I have the following (simplified) React component.
class SalesView extends Component<{}, State> {
state: State = {
salesData: null
};
componentDidMount() {
this.fetchSalesData();
}
render() {
if (this.state.salesData) {
return <SalesChart salesData={this.state.salesData} />;
} else {
return <p>Loading</p>;
}
}
async fetchSalesData() {
let data = await new SalesService().fetchSalesData();
this.setState({ salesData: data });
}
}
When mounting, I fetch data from an API, which I have abstracted away in a class called SalesService. This class I want to mock, and for the method fetchSalesData I want to specify the return data (in a promise).
This is more or less how I want my test case to look like:
predefine test data
import SalesView
mock SalesService
setup mockSalesService to return a promise that returns the predefined test data when resolved
create the component
await
check snapshot
Testing the looks of SalesChart is not part of this question, I hope to solve that using Enzyme. I have been trying dozens of things to mock this asynchronous call, but I cannot seem to get this mocked properly. I have found the following examples of Jest mocking online, but they do not seem to cover this basic usage.
Hackernoon: Does not use asychronous calls
Wehkamp tech blog: Does not use asynchronous calls
Agatha Krzywda: Does not use asynchronous calls
GitConnected: Does not use a class with a function to mock
Jest tutorial An Async Example: Does not use a class with a function to mock
Jest tutorial Testing Asynchronous Code: Does not use a class with a function to mock
SO question 43749845: I can't connect the mock to the real implementation in this way
42638889: Is using dependency injection, I am not
46718663: Is not showing how the actual mock Class is implemented
My questions are:
How should the mock class look like?
Where should I place this mock class?
How should I import this mock class?
How do I tell that this mock class replaces the real class?
How do set up the mock implementation of a specific function of the mock class?
How do I wait in the test case for the promise to be resolved?
One example that I have that does not work is given below. The test runner crashes with the error throw err; and the last line in the stack trace is at process._tickCallback (internal/process/next_tick.js:188:7)
# __tests__/SalesView-test.js
import React from 'react';
import SalesView from '../SalesView';
jest.mock('../SalesService');
const salesServiceMock = require('../SalesService').default;
const weekTestData = [];
test('SalesView shows chart after SalesService returns data', async () => {
salesServiceMock.fetchSalesData.mockImplementation(() => {
console.log('Mock is called');
return new Promise((resolve) => {
process.nextTick(() => resolve(weekTestData));
});
});
const wrapper = await shallow(<SalesView/>);
expect(wrapper).toMatchSnapshot();
});
Sometimes, when a test is hard to write, it is trying to tell us that we have a design problem.
I think a small refactor could make things a lot easier - make SalesService a collaborator instead of an internal.
By that I mean, instead of calling new SalesService() inside your component, accept the sales service as a prop by the calling code. If you do that, then the calling code can also be your test, in which case all you need to do is mock the SalesService itself, and return whatever you want (using sinon or any other mocking library, or even just creating a hand rolled stub).
You could potentially abstract the new keyword away using a SalesService.create() method, then use jest.spyOn(object, methodName) to mock the implementation.
import SalesService from '../SalesService ';
test('SalesView shows chart after SalesService returns data', async () => {
const mockSalesService = {
fetchSalesData: jest.fn(() => {
return new Promise((resolve) => {
process.nextTick(() => resolve(weekTestData));
});
})
};
const spy = jest.spyOn(SalesService, 'create').mockImplementation(() => mockSalesService);
const wrapper = await shallow(<SalesView />);
expect(wrapper).toMatchSnapshot();
expect(spy).toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(mockSalesService.fetchSalesData).toHaveBeenCalled();
spy.mockReset();
spy.mockRestore();
});
One "ugly" way I've used in the past is to do a sort of poor-man's dependency injection.
It's based on the fact that you might not really want to go about instantiating SalesService every time you need it, but rather you want to hold a single instance per application, which everybody uses. In my case, SalesService required some initial configuration which I didn't want to repeat every time.[1]
So what I did was have a services.ts file which looks like this:
/// In services.ts
let salesService: SalesService|null = null;
export function setSalesService(s: SalesService) {
salesService = s;
}
export function getSalesService() {
if(salesService == null) throw new Error('Bad stuff');
return salesService;
}
Then, in my application's index.tsx or some similar place I'd have:
/// In index.tsx
// initialize stuff
const salesService = new SalesService(/* initialization parameters */)
services.setSalesService(salesService);
// other initialization, including calls to React.render etc.
In the components you can then just use getSalesService to get a reference to the one SalesService instance per application.
When it comes time to test, you just need to do some setup in your mocha (or whatever) before or beforeEach handlers to call setSalesService with a mock object.
Now, ideally, you'd want to pass in SalesService as a prop to your component, because it is an input to it, and by using getSalesService you're hiding this dependency and possibly causing you grief down the road. But if you need it in a very nested component, or if you're using a router or somesuch, it's becomes quite unwieldy to pass it as a prop.
You might also get away with using something like context, to keep everything inside React as it were.
The "ideal" solution for this would be something like dependency injection, but that's not an option with React AFAIK.
[1] It can also help in providing a single point for serializing remote-service calls, which might be needed at some point.
Related
I'm writing an integration test for a component that should redirect to a specific path depending on the response from an asynchronous (thunk) redux action.
This is a simplified version of my component:
class MyComponent extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
redirect: false
}
this.props.dispatch(asyncThunkAction())
.then( () => this.setState({redirec: true}) )
.catch( (err) => console.log('action failed') )
}
...
render() {
if (this.state.redirect) {
return <Redirect to='/whocares' />
}
...
}
}
function mapStateToProps(state) {
return {
...
};
}
export default connect(mapStateToProps)(MyComponent);
I want to write a test that asserts that the component redirected to the expected path.
I am using this technique for inspecting the actual redirection path (It's not perfect but it's not the focus of this question).
The place where I am stuck is the state change in the .then() following the redux/thunk action. Because it's a promise, the redirect happens after my expect statement, so I have not been able to test that.
Here's what my test looks like:
const middlewares = [thunk];
const mockStore = configureStore(middlewares);
test('redirects after thunk action', () => {
const redirectUrl = '/whocares'
const data = {};
jest.mock('../actions');
act(() => {
ReactDOM.render(
<TestRouter
ComponentWithRedirection={<MyComponent store={mockStore(data)} />}
RedirectUrl={redirectUrl}
/>,
container);
});
expect(container.innerHTML).toEqual(
expect.stringContaining(redirectUrl)
)
})
My TestRouter just prints the anticipated redirect URL into the DOM. (Check out the link above for a full explanation of this hack.) So right now instead of hitting the expected route, my test (correctly) identifies the loading screen that appears while the thunk action is in progress.
I think the right way to do this is to mock the response from asyncThunkAction so that it returns a resolved promise with matching data, but so far I have not been able to figure out how to do that. I followed the Jest documentation on manual mocks and created the corresponding mock file:
// __mocks__/actions.js
const asyncThunkAction = function(){
return Promise.resolve({foo: 'bar'});
};
export { asyncThunkAction };
...but my test still "sees" the loading state. I don't even think it's looking at my mocked file/action.
What is the right way to do this?
Here's my "recipe" for how I was able to get this working...
Use testing-library/react...
import { render, fireEvent, waitForElement, act } from '#testing-library/react';
(+1 to #tmahle for this suggestion)
Mock axios (or in my case the API module that wraps it) by creating a "manual mock" which basically entails creating a __mocks__ directory next to the real file containing a file by the same name. Then export an object with a property that replaces the get method (or whichever one your code uses).
//__mocks__/myclient.js
export default {
get: jest.fn(() => Promise.resolve({ data: {} }))
};
Even if you don't call the mocked code in your test, you need to import it in the test file...
import myapi from '../api/myapi';
jest.mock('../api/myai');
You can mock the response from the mocked API call like this:
myapi.get.mockResolvedValueOnce({
data: { foo: "bar" },
});
I'm a little fuzzy on this part...
Even though the mocked API request responds immediately with a resolved promise, you probably need to wait for it to write expects
const { getByText, getByTestId, container } = render(<MyComponent />);
await wait(() => getByText('Some text that appears after the '));
expect(container.innerHTML).toEqual('whatever');
All of this was "out there" in various docs and SO questions... but it took me a long time to cobble it all together. Hopefully this saves you time.
This is a little bit of a sideways answer to your question, admittedly, but I would recommend trying out testing-library and the ideals that it embodies, especially for integration tests.
It is available in both DOM and React flavors, which one to use likely depends on what level of abstraction your redirect is happening at:
https://github.com/testing-library/dom-testing-library
https://github.com/testing-library/react-testing-library
With this paradigm you would not try to assert that the user gets redirected to the correct path, but rather that the correct thing is on the screen after they are redirected. You would also limit your mocking to the absolutely bare necessities (likely nothing or only browser API's that your test environment cannot emulate if you are doing a true integration test).
The overall approach here would probably have you mocking out much less and perhaps rendering a larger portion of the app. A likely-helpful example to draw from can be found here: https://codesandbox.io/s/github/kentcdodds/react-testing-library-examples/tree/master/?fontsize=14&module=%2Fsrc%2F__tests__%2Freact-router.js&previewwindow=tests
Because there's less mocking in this approach, the specifics for how you can accomplish this would likely come from outside the scope of the example you've given, but the above example link should help a lot with getting started.
I have a container component where I'm fetching the data via ajax operator from rxjs
const data = ajax(someUrl).pipe(map(r => r.response));
And in my componentDidMount I have
data.subscribe((data) => {
this.setState({ data });
});
// test.js
import React from 'react';
import { mount } from 'enzyme';
import { ajax } from 'rxjs/ajax'
import App from '../src/App';
describe('<App />', () => {
const wrap = mount(<App />);
const data = [{ 1: 'a' }];
const mock = ajax('http://url.com').pipe(map(() => data));
it('renders', () => {
console.log(mock.subscribe(x => x));
expect(wrap.find(App).exists()).toBe(true);
});
});
How do I go about mocking the response so that when I run the test it I can pass that data on to other components and check if they render?
All the testing examples I've found have been redux-Observable ones which I'm not using.
Thanks a lot!
First you need to understand that you should be testing one thing at a time.
Meaning that testing your async method execution should be separated from testing your components rendering proper content.
To test async methods you can mock your data and than mock timers in Jest.
https://jestjs.io/docs/en/tutorial-async
https://jestjs.io/docs/en/asynchronous
https://jestjs.io/docs/en/timer-mocks.html
with jest.useFakeTimers() and techniques mentioned above.
For testing component proper rendering use jest snapshots and e2e testing (can be done with ex. TestCafe)
To connect those approaches you need to design you app in a way that will allow you to:
The API you call in your component, should be external to component and be called from that external source (different file, different class, however you design it), so you can replace it in test.
Whole API should be modular, so you can take one module and test it without initializing whole API just for this case.
If you design your app in such manner, you can initialize part of the API with mock data, than render your component in test and as it will call mocked API, you can check if it renders what you expect it to.
I am fairly new to Jest and Enzyme and I stumbled a cross a problem:
I have a Component which renders Children and also calls a method of those children. I achieve that by using refs. I call these functions something like:
somefunction = () => {
this.myReference.current.childFunction();
this.doSomethingOther();
}
I now want to test the function somefunction. I want to check if the doSomethingOther function was called. Using a shallow render I cannot achieve that. The test would succeed if this.myReference.current.childFunction(); wasn't called. Jest cannot know it because it only renders shallow and therefore throws an error.
I may be missing the full understanding. I wonder if someone has a Idea to test this function without using mount.
Take a look at the below code where I shallow render a component and then get the class instance and mock the required functions. Now when we call somefunction, we check if doSomethingOther has been called. (Assumption you are using jest+enzyme)
const wrapper = shallow(<Comp />);
const inst = wrapper.instance();
inst.myReference = {
current: {
childFunction: jest.fn()
}
}
inst.doSomethingOther = jest.fn();
inst.somefunction();
expect(inst.doSomethingOther).toHaveBeenCalled();
Hi I'm trying to write some unit tests in Jest for a module I write, but kind of stuck currently and need some advice how to continue.
export const submitOrder = async (body, key) => {
const clientRepo = new ClientRepository(db)
const companyRepo = new CompanyRepository(db)
const company = await getCompanyByKey(
companyRepo,
key
);
const client = await createClient(
clientRepo,
body
);
await addClientToCompany(
companyRepo,
client.id,
company.id
);
.. More things
}
I can easily test each function(getCompanyByKey, createClient & addClientToCompany) by passing down a mocked repository.
But I would also like to test my "flow" of the submitOrder function, by checking if my repository functions have been called. But I would then need the instance of each repository, which I don't instantiate until my submitOrder function.
Something like this, which is similar how I unit test my functions.
jest.mock('../repositories/ClientRepository');
jest.mock('../repositories/CompanyRepository');
test('should be able to submit an order', async () => {
const apiKey = 'mocked-super-key';
const body = getMockData();
const result = await submitOrder(body, apiKey);
expect(result).toMatchSnapshot();
expect(CompanyRepository.findByKey).toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(ClientRepository.create).toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(CompanyRepository.addClient).toHaveBeenCalled();
});
Do you have any tips of how I can test if my repositories have been called?
The problem you describe is one of the motivating factors behind dependency injection.
As a single example: your submitOrder() code uses new to directly instantiate a client repository of the specific implementation ClientRepository. Instead, it could declare that it has a dependency - it needs an object that implements the interface of a client repository. It could then allow for such an object to be supplied by the surrounding environment (a "dependency injection container" in buzzword-ese). Then during testing you would create and provide ("inject") a mock implementation instead of the real implementation.
This has the added benefit that if you ever have to be able to select between multiple "real" implementations, you're already set up to do that too.
There are many ways to achieve this. It can be as simple as a design pattern, or for a more complete solution you could use a dependency injection framework.
If you absolutely cannot refactor your code for this practice, then JavaScript is dynamic enough that you can probably cobble together a way to intercept the invocation of new and thereby simulate dependency injection.
You can pass a mock implementation factory as a second parameter to jest.mock, as described in the docs.
You can use this to mock out the methods that you want to check to have been called.
Try this:
jest.mock('../repositories/CompanyRepository', () => {
findByKey: jest.fn(),
addClient: jest.jn()
});
const mockCreate = jest.fn();
jest.mock('../repositories/CompanyRepository', () => class {
create(...args) {
mockCreate(...args);
}
});
test('should be able to submit an order', async () => {
const apiKey = 'mocked-super-key';
const body = getMockData();
const result = await submitOrder(body, apiKey);
expect(result).toMatchSnapshot();
expect(CompanyRepository.findByKey).toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(ClientRepository.create).toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(CompanyRepository.addClient).toHaveBeenCalled();
});
Since CompanyRepository is created with “new”, we use a class definition in this case and pass in a mock function that is called when the “create” method is invoked.
I have this aurelia component for displaying a feed to the user which depends on a custom API service class called Api for fetching the feed. The Api class has a get() function which in turn uses HttpClient to fetch the data.
Trying to test the component I want to mock the service class, specifically the get function, to return suitable test data and have this mock injected into the component via aurelia's DI container. The DI part I am having trouble with.
Here is the relevant part of component's js file
import {bindable, inject} from 'aurelia-framework';
import {Api} from 'services/api';
#inject(Api)
export class Feed {
events = null;
constructor(api) {
console.info('feed.js constructor, api:', api)
this.api = api;
}
And the relevant code from my test
beforeEach(done => {
...
let mockApi = new Api();
spyOn(mockApi, 'get').and.returnValue(mockGetResponse);
const customConfig = (aurelia) => {
let conf = aurelia.use.standardConfiguration().instance("Api", mockApi);
console.info('Registering Api:', conf.container.get("Api"));
return conf;
}
const ct = new ComponentTester();
ct.configure = customConfig;
sut = ct.withResources('activityfeed/feed');
sut.inView('<feed username.bind="username"></feed>')
.boundTo({username: TEST_USER});
sut.create(bootstrap).then(() => {
done();
});
});
This code is actually working the way I intended as far as I can tell. On creation of the component my customConfig function is called and the mockApi instance is logged to the console.
However later in the bootstrapping process the component constructor still receives an instance of the actual Api service class instead of my mock instance which was registered to the container.
Spent the last couple of hours trying to dig up any documentation or examples for doing things like this without success so if anyone can assist I would greatly appreciate it.
Or if there is / are alternative ways to accomplish this that would work just as well.
When testing a standard component that consists of both a view and a view model, using the aurelia-testing package, I find that a cleaner approach might be to let Aurelia create both the view and view-model, and use mocked classes for all view model dependencies.
export class MockApi {
response = undefined;
get() { return Promise.resolve(this.response) }
}
describe("the feed component", () => {
let component;
let api = new MockApi();
beforeEach(() => {
api.response = null;
component = StageComponent
.withResources("feed/feed")
.inView("<feed></feed>");
component.bootstrap(aurelia => {
aurelia.use
.standardConfiguration();
aurelia.container.registerInstance(Api, api);
});
});
it("should work", done => {
api.response = "My response";
component.create(bootstrap).then(() => {
const element = document.querySelector("#selector");
expect(element.innerHTML).toBe("My response, or something");
done();
});
});
});
This approach lets you verify the rendered HTML using the normal view model class, mocking the dependencies to control the test data.
Just to answer my own question, at least partially, if it can be useful to someone.
By using the actual Api class constructor as the key instead of the string "Api" the mock seems to be correctly injected.
I.e.
import {Api} from 'services/api';
...
let conf = aurelia.use.standardConfiguration().instance(Api, mockApi);