I want to test that a promise does not resolve in jasmine. It appears that I might be able to use not.toBeResolved(), but when I do I get a timeout error:
it('should not resolve', async () => {
const unresolvablePromise = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {});
await expectAsync(unresolvablePromise).not.toBeResolved();
});
Error: Timeout - Async function did not complete within 5000ms (set by jasmine.DEFAULT_TIMEOUT_INTERVAL)
I expected this would be the idea of not.toBeResolved - that if the promise hadn't resolved in the timeout period the test would pass.
I am guessing .not.toBeResolved is a catch 22 where it never resolves because it is awaiting for the promise and then asserting it.
I would do something like this:
// add the done callback
it('should not resolve', (done) => {
// assign a variable to determine if the promise was resolved
let promiseResolved = false;
const unresolvablePromise = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {});
// call Jasmine fail if it does resolve thereby failing the test
// and update the variable to true
unresolvablePromise.then(() => {
promiseResolved = true;
fail();
});
// 500ms (ample time for the promise to resolve), expect the variable to be false
// and call done
setTimeout(() => {
expect(promiseResolved).toBeFalse();
done();
}, 500);
});
If you expect the promise to be in a pending state, use:
await expectAsync(promise).toBePending();
https://jasmine.github.io/api/3.7/async-matchers.html#toBePending
Related
I wrote a function I try to test with jest:
asyncUpperCase(value: string): Promise<string> {
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
setTimeout(() => {
return resolve(value.toUpperCase())
}, 1000);
})
}
It recives a string and turns it into a upperCase string (asynchronally).
I have to tests:
it('upperCase with promise and then', () => {
return myAsync.asyncUpperCase('hello world').then(value => {
expect(value).toBe('HELLO WORLD');
})
})
it('upperCase with promise and resolve', () => {
const promise = myAsync.asyncUpperCase('hello world');
expect(promise).resolves.toBe('HELLO WORLD');
})
First test works correctly. But the second test does never fail. So if I change the expected string to ABC it still exits with success. Why and how do i use resolves correctly?
A promise is asynchronous and needs time to be resolved, there's no way how resolves can fail synchronous test. Without being chained inside a test, it will result in unhandled rejection if test run is long enough.
It should be:
await expect(promise).resolves.toBe('HELLO WORLD');
Jest provides 3 options to properly handle asynchronous tests documentation
Returning a promise
it('upperCase with promise and resolve', () => {
const promise = myAsync.asyncUpperCase('hello world');
return expect(promise).resolves.toBe('HELLO WORLD');
})
Using async/await
Which is quite the same as an async function will return Promise<void>
it('upperCase with promise and resolve', async () => {
const promise = myAsync.asyncUpperCase('hello world');
expect(await promise).toBe('HELLO WORLD');
})
Using a callback
it('upperCase with promise and resolve', (done) => {
const promise = myAsync.asyncUpperCase('hello world');
promise
.then(result => expect(promise).toBe('HELLO WORLD'))
.then(done);
})
also you may take a look at Advance Timers by Time
I'm seeing some inconsistent behaviour when dealing with a promise that fails to resolve due to an unforeseen uncaught exception. It seems that depending on how I chain the promise changes whether this promise resolves and I don't understand why.
Here is the bad function:
function bad() {
return new Promise(resolve => {
setTimeout(() => {
throw 'unforseen exception!';
resolve();
}, 50);
});
}
If I call this function these ways it does not resolve:
bad().then(() => console.log('resolved')); // no console logging
try {
await bad();
} catch(e) {
console.log(e);
}
console.log('resolved'); // no console logging
But calling it like this does resolve:
Promise.resolve().then(bad()).then(() => console.log('resolved')); // console logs "resolved"
Why is this? Edit: I now understand what I was doing wrong. But what I really want to answer is the next part.
And how do I best protect myself against unforeseen exceptions when I have a chain of promises that need to be run serially and need to continue even if there is a failure somewhere along the chain?
I have also tried using catch or finally but they don't seem to make any difference. Once that unresolved promise is reached, execution fails.
The problem is that bad() throws an error asynchronously in such a way that the error can't be detected by the caller. If you want to throw an error inside a new Promise... segment, you should call the reject function:
function bad() {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
reject('bad!');
resolve();
}, 50);
});
}
bad()
.then(() => console.log('resolved'))
.catch((err) => console.log(err));
(async () => {
try {
await bad();
} catch(e) {
console.log(e);
}
console.log('await finished');
})();
The reason your
Promise.resolve().then(bad()).then
calls the next .then is because then accepts a function as a parameter, but your bad() is invoking bad in the beginning, while the interpreter is trying to come up with the Promise chain. If you had passed bad as the function parameter instead of calling it, you would see similar broken behavior as in your original code - the Promise would never resolve:
function bad() {
return new Promise(resolve => {
setTimeout(() => {
throw 'unforseen exception!';
resolve();
}, 50);
});
}
// Promise never resolves:
Promise.resolve().then(bad).then(() => console.log('resolved'));
In contrast, .then(bad()) will evaluate to a non-function, and hence that .then will resolve immediately, so the interpreter will go on to the next .then immediately as well.
In this code:
new Promise(resolve => {
setTimeout(() => {
throw 'unforseen exception!';
resolve();
}, 50);
});
The throw is happening in a non-async callback function. The way to handle something like this would be to use a try/catch statement on the code that could throw:
new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
try {
throw 'unforseen exception!';
resolve();
}
catch (err) {
reject(err);
}
}, 50);
});
Why is it exactly that the a resolveing promise correctly waits for the someOtherPromise to complete, but the reject does not? Run the following code sample and check the console.log output. I expected the "myFailingPromise rejected" message to show 2000 ms later, just as the "myPromise resolved" did.
let someOtherPromise = (previousPromise) => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
console.log(previousPromise + ' => someOtherPromise after 2000ms');
resolve('someOtherPromise');
}, 2000);
});
}
let myPromise = () => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
resolve(someOtherPromise('myPromise'));
});
};
let myFailingPromise = () => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
reject(someOtherPromise('myFailingPromise'));
});
};
myPromise().then((val) => {
// this is executed after `someOtherPromise` resolves.
console.log('myPromise resolved');
}).catch((err) => {
console.log('myPromise rejected');
});
myFailingPromise().then((val) => {
// this is executed after `someOtherPromise` resolves.
console.log('myFailingPromise resolved');
}).catch((err) => {
console.log('myFailingPromise rejected');
});
I know the intended behaviour can be achieved by using someOtherPromise.then(reject) in the second example, but my question is why the promise as an argument to reject is not possible, since it works for resolve.
When you're resolving a promise A, if the value with which you're resolving it is a promise B, then your promise A will match the state of the promise B.
However, when you're rejecting a promise, your only giving a reason, whether the reason looks or not like a promise doesn't matter.
What you need to do, is to resolve with someOtherPromise in both cases.
If you want to wait for the first promise and reject anyway, you can do this:
let myFailingPromise = () => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
someOtherPromise.then(reject);
});
};
The reject only takes in a reason to highlight the error. Not another promise. You can resolve a promise with another promise of the same type, yet only the last promise's success case you will see.
Have a look at this adapted implementation:
const someOtherPromise = new Promise((resolve, _) => {
resolve("I am a success");
});
const failingPromise = new Promise((_, reject) => {
reject("I failed for a reason");
});
someOtherPromise
.then((result) => {
console.log("some other promise resolves", result);
failingPromise
.then((success) => {
console.log("never called");
})
.catch((reason) => {
console.error("failing promise rejects", reason);
});
}
)
.catch((error) => {
console.error("also never called", error);
});
This is the then-able approach to wait for other promises leading to a callback hell. This is why you can also use async / await syntax:
const app = async () => {
try {
const success1 = await someOtherPromise; // will succeed
console.log(success1);
const success2 = await failingPromise; // never succceds
console.log(success2); // never be reached
} catch (e) {
return Promise.reject(e); // catches the error of failing promise and rethrows it, redundant but here showcases error handling
}
}
;
app()
.then(() => {
console.log("never be reached because of failing promise");
})
.catch(console.error);
In regards to your updated question with the timeout, here is what you could do in order to always await another promise:
const otherPromise = async (willBeSuccesful: boolean) => {
console.log("started timer for case", willBeSuccesful);
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
console.log("resolve timer for case", willBeSuccesful);
const successValue = "Fnord"; // whatever you want
return willBeSuccesful
? resolve(successValue)
: reject("this other promise failed because of reasons"); // only provide a reason, not another promise
});
};
};
const alwaysWaitForOtherPromiseThenRejectAnyway = async (otherPromise) => {
try {
const success = await otherPromise; // always waits 2 seconds, not matter
console.log("other promises succeeded with value", success);
} catch (e) {
return Promise.reject(e); // passing through reason, redundant, only to showcase
}
return Promise.reject("reason why this promise failed"); // only happens after otherPromise was resolved, you could swallow that error and fail here or resolve here as well
};
const succeedingPromise = otherPromise(true);
const failingPromise = otherPromise(false);
alwaysWaitForOtherPromiseThenRejectAnyway(succeedingPromise)
.catch((reason) => console.error(reason)); // fail after waiting for success of other promise
alwaysWaitForOtherPromiseThenRejectAnyway(failingPromise)
.catch((reason) => console.error(reason)); // will fail as soon as otherPromise fails
It will always wait for the timeout before rejection happens. Rejection will have different reasons. Output will be:
started timer for case true
started timer for case false
resolve timer for case true
resolve timer for case false
other promises succeeded with value Fnord
reason why this promise failed
this other promise failed because of reasons
As far as I know, there are two options about promise:
promise.all()
promise.race()
Ok, I know what promise.all() does. It runs promises in parallel, and .then gives you the values if both resolved successfully. Here is an example:
Promise.all([
$.ajax({ url: 'test1.php' }),
$.ajax({ url: 'test2.php' })
])
.then(([res1, res2]) => {
// Both requests resolved
})
.catch(error => {
// Something went wrong
});
But I don't understand what does promise.race() is supposed to do exactly? In other word, what's the difference with not using it? Assume this:
$.ajax({
url: 'test1.php',
async: true,
success: function (data) {
// This request resolved
}
});
$.ajax({
url: 'test2.php',
async: true,
success: function (data) {
// This request resolved
}
});
See? I haven't used promise.race() and it behaves like promise.race(). Anyway, is there any simple and clean example to show me when exactly should I use promise.race() ?
As you see, the race() will return the promise instance which is firstly resolved or rejected:
var p1 = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
setTimeout(resolve, 500, 'one');
});
var p2 = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
setTimeout(resolve, 100, 'two');
});
Promise.race([p1, p2]).then(function(value) {
console.log(value); // "two"
// Both resolve, but p2 is faster
});
For a scenes to be used， maybe you want to limit the cost time of a request ：
var p = Promise.race([
fetch('/resource-that-may-take-a-while'),
new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
setTimeout(() => reject(new Error('request timeout')), 5000)
})
])
p.then(response => console.log(response))
p.catch(error => console.log(error))
With the race() you just need to get the returned promise, you needn't care about which one of the promises in the race([]) firstly returned,
However, without the race, just like your example, you need to care about which one will firstly returned, and called the callback in the both success callback.
I've used it for request batching. We had to batch tens of thousands of records into batches for a long running execution. We could do it in parallel, but didn't want the number of pending requests to get out of hand.
Race lets us keep a fixed number of parallel promises running and add one to replace whenever one completes
const _ = require('lodash')
async function batchRequests(options) {
let query = { offset: 0, limit: options.limit };
do {
batch = await model.findAll(query);
query.offset += options.limit;
if (batch.length) {
const promise = doLongRequestForBatch(batch).then(() => {
// Once complete, pop this promise from our array
// so that we know we can add another batch in its place
_.remove(promises, p => p === promise);
});
promises.push(promise);
// Once we hit our concurrency limit, wait for at least one promise to
// resolve before continuing to batch off requests
if (promises.length >= options.concurrentBatches) {
await Promise.race(promises);
}
}
} while (batch.length);
// Wait for remaining batches to finish
return Promise.all(promises);
}
batchRequests({ limit: 100, concurrentBatches: 5 });
It's a piece to build a timeout system, where:
the request/computation may be canceled by another channel
it will still be used later, but we need an interaction now.
For an example of the second, one might show a spinner "instantly" while still defaulting to show real content if it comes in fast enough. Try running the below a few times - note at least some console message comes "instantly". This might normally be attached to perform operations on a UI.
The key to note is - the result of Promise.race is much less important than the side effects (though, this then is a code smell).
// 300 ms _feels_ "instant", and flickers are bad
function getUserInfo(user) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
// had it at 1500 to be more true-to-life, but 900 is better for testing
setTimeout(() => resolve("user data!"), Math.floor(900*Math.random()));
});
}
function showUserInfo(user) {
return getUserInfo().then(info => {
console.log("user info:", info);
return true;
});
}
function showSpinner() {
console.log("please wait...")
}
function timeout(delay, result) {
return new Promise(resolve => {
setTimeout(() => resolve(result), delay);
});
}
Promise.race([showUserInfo(), timeout(300)]).then(displayed => {
if (!displayed) showSpinner();
});
Inspiration credit to a comment by captainkovalsky.
An example of the first:
function timeout(delay) {
let cancel;
const wait = new Promise(resolve => {
const timer = setTimeout(() => resolve(false), delay);
cancel = () => {
clearTimeout(timer);
resolve(true);
};
});
wait.cancel = cancel;
return wait;
}
function doWork() {
const workFactor = Math.floor(600*Math.random());
const work = timeout(workFactor);
const result = work.then(canceled => {
if (canceled)
console.log('Work canceled');
else
console.log('Work done in', workFactor, 'ms');
return !canceled;
});
result.cancel = work.cancel;
return result;
}
function attemptWork() {
const work = doWork();
return Promise.race([work, timeout(300)])
.then(done => {
if (!done)
work.cancel();
return (done ? 'Work complete!' : 'I gave up');
});
}
attemptWork().then(console.log);
You can see from this one that the timeout's console.log is never executed when the timeout hits first. It should fail/succeed about half/half, for testing convenience.
Here's an easy example to understand the use of promise.race():
Imagine you need to fetch some data from a server and if the data takes too long to load (say 15 seconds) you want to show an error.
You would call promise.race() with two promises, the first being your ajax request and the second being a simple setTimeout(() => resolve("ERROR"), 15000)
Summary:
Promise.race is a JS built in function that accepts an iterable of Promises (e.g. Array) as an argument. This function then asynchronously returns a Promise as soon as one in of the Promises passed in the iterable is either resolved or rejected.
Example 1:
var promise1 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve('Promise-one'), 500);
});
var promise2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve('Promise-two'), 100);
});
Promise.race([promise1, promise2]).then((value) => {
console.log(value);
// Both resolve, but promise2 is faster than promise 1
});
In this example first an array of Promises is passed in Promise.race. Both of the promises resolve but promise1 resolves faster. Therefore the promise is resolved with the value of promise1, which is the string 'Promise-one'.
Example 2:
const promise1 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve('succes'), 2000);
});
const promise2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => reject('err'), 1000);
});
Promise.race([promise1, promise2])
.then((value) => {
console.log(value);
}).catch((value) => {
console.log('error: ' + value);
});
In this second example the second promise rejects faster than the first promise can resolve. Therefore Promise.race will return a rejected promise with the value of 'err' which was the value that Promise2 rejected with.
The key point to understand is that Promice.race takes an iterable of Promises and returns a Promise based on the first resolved or rejected promise in that iterable (with the corresponding resolve() or reject() values).
Let's take an sample workaround of Promise.race like below.
const race = (promises) => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
return promises.forEach(f => f.then(resolve).catch(reject));
})
};
You can see race function executes all promises, but whomever finishes first will resolve/reject with wrapper Promise.
As far as I know, there are two options about promise:
promise.all()
promise.race()
Ok, I know what promise.all() does. It runs promises in parallel, and .then gives you the values if both resolved successfully. Here is an example:
Promise.all([
$.ajax({ url: 'test1.php' }),
$.ajax({ url: 'test2.php' })
])
.then(([res1, res2]) => {
// Both requests resolved
})
.catch(error => {
// Something went wrong
});
But I don't understand what does promise.race() is supposed to do exactly? In other word, what's the difference with not using it? Assume this:
$.ajax({
url: 'test1.php',
async: true,
success: function (data) {
// This request resolved
}
});
$.ajax({
url: 'test2.php',
async: true,
success: function (data) {
// This request resolved
}
});
See? I haven't used promise.race() and it behaves like promise.race(). Anyway, is there any simple and clean example to show me when exactly should I use promise.race() ?
As you see, the race() will return the promise instance which is firstly resolved or rejected:
var p1 = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
setTimeout(resolve, 500, 'one');
});
var p2 = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
setTimeout(resolve, 100, 'two');
});
Promise.race([p1, p2]).then(function(value) {
console.log(value); // "two"
// Both resolve, but p2 is faster
});
For a scenes to be used， maybe you want to limit the cost time of a request ：
var p = Promise.race([
fetch('/resource-that-may-take-a-while'),
new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
setTimeout(() => reject(new Error('request timeout')), 5000)
})
])
p.then(response => console.log(response))
p.catch(error => console.log(error))
With the race() you just need to get the returned promise, you needn't care about which one of the promises in the race([]) firstly returned,
However, without the race, just like your example, you need to care about which one will firstly returned, and called the callback in the both success callback.
I've used it for request batching. We had to batch tens of thousands of records into batches for a long running execution. We could do it in parallel, but didn't want the number of pending requests to get out of hand.
Race lets us keep a fixed number of parallel promises running and add one to replace whenever one completes
const _ = require('lodash')
async function batchRequests(options) {
let query = { offset: 0, limit: options.limit };
do {
batch = await model.findAll(query);
query.offset += options.limit;
if (batch.length) {
const promise = doLongRequestForBatch(batch).then(() => {
// Once complete, pop this promise from our array
// so that we know we can add another batch in its place
_.remove(promises, p => p === promise);
});
promises.push(promise);
// Once we hit our concurrency limit, wait for at least one promise to
// resolve before continuing to batch off requests
if (promises.length >= options.concurrentBatches) {
await Promise.race(promises);
}
}
} while (batch.length);
// Wait for remaining batches to finish
return Promise.all(promises);
}
batchRequests({ limit: 100, concurrentBatches: 5 });
It's a piece to build a timeout system, where:
the request/computation may be canceled by another channel
it will still be used later, but we need an interaction now.
For an example of the second, one might show a spinner "instantly" while still defaulting to show real content if it comes in fast enough. Try running the below a few times - note at least some console message comes "instantly". This might normally be attached to perform operations on a UI.
The key to note is - the result of Promise.race is much less important than the side effects (though, this then is a code smell).
// 300 ms _feels_ "instant", and flickers are bad
function getUserInfo(user) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
// had it at 1500 to be more true-to-life, but 900 is better for testing
setTimeout(() => resolve("user data!"), Math.floor(900*Math.random()));
});
}
function showUserInfo(user) {
return getUserInfo().then(info => {
console.log("user info:", info);
return true;
});
}
function showSpinner() {
console.log("please wait...")
}
function timeout(delay, result) {
return new Promise(resolve => {
setTimeout(() => resolve(result), delay);
});
}
Promise.race([showUserInfo(), timeout(300)]).then(displayed => {
if (!displayed) showSpinner();
});
Inspiration credit to a comment by captainkovalsky.
An example of the first:
function timeout(delay) {
let cancel;
const wait = new Promise(resolve => {
const timer = setTimeout(() => resolve(false), delay);
cancel = () => {
clearTimeout(timer);
resolve(true);
};
});
wait.cancel = cancel;
return wait;
}
function doWork() {
const workFactor = Math.floor(600*Math.random());
const work = timeout(workFactor);
const result = work.then(canceled => {
if (canceled)
console.log('Work canceled');
else
console.log('Work done in', workFactor, 'ms');
return !canceled;
});
result.cancel = work.cancel;
return result;
}
function attemptWork() {
const work = doWork();
return Promise.race([work, timeout(300)])
.then(done => {
if (!done)
work.cancel();
return (done ? 'Work complete!' : 'I gave up');
});
}
attemptWork().then(console.log);
You can see from this one that the timeout's console.log is never executed when the timeout hits first. It should fail/succeed about half/half, for testing convenience.
Here's an easy example to understand the use of promise.race():
Imagine you need to fetch some data from a server and if the data takes too long to load (say 15 seconds) you want to show an error.
You would call promise.race() with two promises, the first being your ajax request and the second being a simple setTimeout(() => resolve("ERROR"), 15000)
Summary:
Promise.race is a JS built in function that accepts an iterable of Promises (e.g. Array) as an argument. This function then asynchronously returns a Promise as soon as one in of the Promises passed in the iterable is either resolved or rejected.
Example 1:
var promise1 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve('Promise-one'), 500);
});
var promise2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve('Promise-two'), 100);
});
Promise.race([promise1, promise2]).then((value) => {
console.log(value);
// Both resolve, but promise2 is faster than promise 1
});
In this example first an array of Promises is passed in Promise.race. Both of the promises resolve but promise1 resolves faster. Therefore the promise is resolved with the value of promise1, which is the string 'Promise-one'.
Example 2:
const promise1 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve('succes'), 2000);
});
const promise2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => reject('err'), 1000);
});
Promise.race([promise1, promise2])
.then((value) => {
console.log(value);
}).catch((value) => {
console.log('error: ' + value);
});
In this second example the second promise rejects faster than the first promise can resolve. Therefore Promise.race will return a rejected promise with the value of 'err' which was the value that Promise2 rejected with.
The key point to understand is that Promice.race takes an iterable of Promises and returns a Promise based on the first resolved or rejected promise in that iterable (with the corresponding resolve() or reject() values).
Let's take an sample workaround of Promise.race like below.
const race = (promises) => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
return promises.forEach(f => f.then(resolve).catch(reject));
})
};
You can see race function executes all promises, but whomever finishes first will resolve/reject with wrapper Promise.