[REFACTOR]: Jest to Vitest migration for UserListCard.test.tsx #2924
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request focuses on refactoring the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🧰 Additional context used📓 Learnings (1)📓 Common learnings🔇 Additional comments (4)src/components/UserListCard/UserListCard.spec.tsx (4)
The migration to Vitest is properly implemented with the necessary imports, and the testing-library imports are well organized. Also applies to: 12-12
The wait function correctly uses
The Line range hint The test cases have been correctly migrated from Jest's Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Our Pull Request Approval ProcessThanks for contributing! Testing Your CodeRemember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:
Our policies make our code better. ReviewersDo not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
Reviewing Your CodeYour reviewer(s) will have the following roles:
CONTRIBUTING.mdRead our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:
Other
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/components/UserListCard/UserListCard.spec.tsx (1)
61-63: Re-check test coverage on missing props.
Good job testing the scenario where props are not passed. Double-check that these tests fully cover edge cases and gracefully handle undefined properties in the component.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
src/components/CheckIn/tagTemplate.ts(2 hunks)src/components/UserListCard/UserListCard.spec.tsx(4 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: Performs linting, formatting, type-checking, checking for different source and target branch
src/components/CheckIn/tagTemplate.ts
[failure] 6-6:
Object literal may only specify known properties, and 'name' does not exist in type 'objectOutputType<{ name: ZodString; type: ZodString; content: ZodOptional; position: ZodObject<{ x: ZodNumber; y: ZodNumber; }, "strip", ZodTypeAny, { ...; }, { ...; }>; ... 7 more ...; __isSplit: ZodOptional<...>; }, ZodTypeAny, "passthrough">[]'.
🔇 Additional comments (7)
src/components/UserListCard/UserListCard.spec.tsx (5)
1-2: Great switch to act from @testing-library/react.
The addition of act ensures that the state updates and effects are flushed correctly during testing.
12-14: Consider verifying alert calls.
You've introduced vi.spyOn(global, 'alert') to mock alerts. Ensure that the alerts are verified for the necessary side effects or confirmations within your test cases.
34-34: Neat simplification of the wait() function.
Using a single statement with await act(() => new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, ms))); is concise and still safe.
38-40: Check for leftover spy implementations.
Using vi.spyOn(global, 'alert').mockImplementation(...) in beforeEach is good, but ensure that it’s restored or cleared in an afterEach block if each test independently relies on a fresh spy.
42-44: All tests remain effective post-migration.
The usage of Vitest's it blocks, combined with the updated user actions, looks consistent. Confirm coverage is still at 100%.
src/components/CheckIn/tagTemplate.ts (2)
1-1: Switch to type import is a good practice.
Importing Template as a type clarifies that we'll only be using it in a type position.
Line range hint 5-18: Confirm that the updated schema structure aligns with any downstream consumers.
The schema was changed from an array of arrays to an array of a single object. Ensure other dependent areas in the codebase that reference or iterate over schemas still function correctly, avoiding runtime errors.
- schemas: [
- [
- ...
- ],
- ],
+ schemas: [
+ {
+ name: {
+ ...
+ },
+ },
+ ],🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Performs linting, formatting, type-checking, checking for different source and target branch
[failure] 6-6:
Object literal may only specify known properties, and 'name' does not exist in type 'objectOutputType<{ name: ZodString; type: ZodString; content: ZodOptional; position: ZodObject<{ x: ZodNumber; y: ZodNumber; }, "strip", ZodTypeAny, { ...; }, { ...; }>; ... 7 more ...; __isSplit: ZodOptional<...>; }, ZodTypeAny, "passthrough">[]'.
|
@palisadoes this file was trouble due to some type error. #2804 Is it linked to this PR? |
|
It might have been, however all the PR tests passed. Pleases make the appropriate adjustments to fix it. |
|
@hustlernik pull the latest changes from develop-postgres, and install the new package that was introduced. As in the PR that you mentioned package.json was modified. |
|
@syedali237 My bad, idk how I missed it. Thank you. |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop-postgres #2924 +/- ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage 58.52% 88.13% +29.60%
=====================================================
Files 299 316 +17
Lines 7414 8265 +851
Branches 1621 1810 +189
=====================================================
+ Hits 4339 7284 +2945
+ Misses 2828 770 -2058
+ Partials 247 211 -36 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
@coderabbitai full review |
✅ Actions performedFull review triggered. |
palisadoes
merged commit 732f8c9
into
PalisadoesFoundation:develop-postgres
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
This PR migrates the test cases in src/component/UserListCard.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest, ensuring compatibility with Vitest .
✅ Replace Jest-specific functions and mocks with Vitest equivalents
✅ Ensure all tests in src/component/UserListCard.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest.pass after migration using npm run test:vitest
✅ Maintain the test coverage for the file as 100% after migration
✅ Upload a video or photo for this specific file coverage is 100% in the PR description
Issue Number:
Fixes #2824
Did you add tests for your changes?
No
Snapshots/Videos:
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No
Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes
Summary by CodeRabbit
UserListCardcomponent with improved import statements and simplified function calls.jesttovitestand updated mocking approach.