mirror of https://github.com/zulip/zulip.git
299 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
299 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
# JavaScript/TypeScript unit tests
|
|
|
|
Our node-based unit tests system is the preferred way to test
|
|
JavaScript/TypeScript code in Zulip. We prefer it over the [Puppeteer
|
|
black-box whole-app testing](testing-with-puppeteer.md),
|
|
system since it is much (>100x) faster and also easier to do correctly
|
|
than the Puppeteer system.
|
|
|
|
You can run this test suite as follows:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
tools/test-js-with-node
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
See `test-js-with-node --help` for useful options; even though the
|
|
whole suite is quite fast, it still saves time to run a single test by
|
|
name when debugging something.
|
|
|
|
The JS unit tests are written to work with node. You can find them
|
|
in `web/tests`. Here is an example test from
|
|
`web/tests/stream_data.test.js`:
|
|
|
|
```js
|
|
(function test_get_by_id() {
|
|
stream_data.clear_subscriptions();
|
|
var id = 42;
|
|
var sub = {
|
|
name: 'Denmark',
|
|
subscribed: true,
|
|
color: 'red',
|
|
stream_id: id
|
|
};
|
|
stream_data.add_sub('Denmark', sub);
|
|
sub = stream_data.get_sub('Denmark');
|
|
assert.equal(sub.color, 'red');
|
|
sub = sub_store.get(id);
|
|
assert.equal(sub.color, 'red');
|
|
}());
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The names of the node tests generally align with the names of the
|
|
modules they test. If you modify a JS module in `web/src` you should
|
|
see if there are corresponding test in `web/tests`. If
|
|
there are, you should strive to follow the patterns of the existing tests
|
|
and add your own tests.
|
|
|
|
A good first test to read is
|
|
[example1.js](https://github.com/zulip/zulip/blob/main/web/tests/example1.test.js).
|
|
(And then there are several other example files.)
|
|
|
|
## How the node tests work
|
|
|
|
Unlike the [Puppeteer unit tests](testing-with-puppeteer.md),
|
|
which use a headless Chromium browser connected to a running Zulip
|
|
development server, our node unit tests don't have a browser, don't
|
|
talk to a server, and generally don't use a complete virtual DOM (a
|
|
handful of tests use the `jsdom` library for this purpose) because
|
|
those slow down the tests a lot, and often don't add much value.
|
|
|
|
Instead, the preferred model for our unit tests is to mock DOM
|
|
manipulations (which in Zulip are almost exclusively done via
|
|
`jQuery`) using a custom library
|
|
[zjquery](https://github.com/zulip/zulip/blob/main/web/tests/lib/zjquery.js).
|
|
|
|
The
|
|
[unit test file](https://github.com/zulip/zulip/blob/main/web/tests/zjquery.test.js)
|
|
for `zjquery` is designed to be also serve as nice documentation for
|
|
how to use `zjquery`, and is **highly recommended reading** for anyone
|
|
working on or debugging the Zulip node tests.
|
|
|
|
Conceptually, the `zjquery` library provides minimal versions of most
|
|
`jQuery` DOM manipulation functions, and has a convenient system for
|
|
letting you set up return values for more complex functions. For
|
|
example, if the code you'd like to test calls `$obj.find()`, you can
|
|
use `$obj.set_find_results(selector, $value)` to set up `zjquery` so
|
|
that calls to `$obj.find(selector)` will return `$value`. See the unit
|
|
test file for details.
|
|
|
|
This process of substituting `jQuery` functions with our own code for
|
|
testing purposes is known as "stubbing". `zjquery` does not stub all
|
|
possible interactions with the dom, as such, you may need to write out
|
|
the stub for a function you're calling in your patch. Typically the stub
|
|
is just placed in the test file, to prevent bloating of `zjquery`
|
|
with functions that are only used in a single test.
|
|
|
|
If you need to stub, you will see an error of this form:
|
|
`Error: You must create a stub for $("#foo").bar`
|
|
|
|
The `zjquery` library itself is only about 500 lines of code, and can
|
|
also be a useful resource if you're having trouble debugging DOM
|
|
access in the unit tests.
|
|
|
|
It is typically a good idea to figure out how to stub a given function
|
|
based on how other functions have been stubbed in the same file.
|
|
|
|
## Handling dependencies in unit tests
|
|
|
|
The other big challenge with doing unit tests for a JavaScript project
|
|
is that often one wants to limit the scope the production code being
|
|
run, just to avoid doing extra setup work that isn't relevant to the
|
|
code you're trying to test. For that reason, each unit test file
|
|
explicitly declares all of the modules it depends on, with a few
|
|
different types of declarations depending on whether we want to:
|
|
|
|
- Exercise the module's real code for deeper, more realistic testing?
|
|
- Stub out the module's interface for more control, speed, and
|
|
isolation?
|
|
- Do some combination of the above?
|
|
|
|
For all the modules where you want to run actual code, add statements
|
|
like the following toward the top of your test file:
|
|
|
|
```js
|
|
zrequire('util');
|
|
zrequire('stream_data');
|
|
zrequire('Filter', 'js/filter');
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
For modules that you want to completely stub out, use a pattern like
|
|
this:
|
|
|
|
```js
|
|
const reminder = mock_esm("../../web/src/reminder", {
|
|
is_deferred_delivery: noop,
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
// then maybe further down
|
|
reminder.is_deferred_delivery = () => true;
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
One can similarly stub out functions in a module's exported interface
|
|
with either `noop` functions or actual code.
|
|
|
|
Finally, there's the hybrid situation, where you want to borrow some
|
|
of a module's real functionality but stub out other pieces. Obviously,
|
|
this is a pretty strong code smell that the other module might be
|
|
lacking in cohesion, but sometimes it's not worth going down the
|
|
rabbit hole of trying to improve that. The pattern here is this:
|
|
|
|
```js
|
|
// Import real code.
|
|
zrequire('narrow_state');
|
|
|
|
// And later...
|
|
narrow_state.stream = function () {
|
|
return 'office';
|
|
};
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Creating new test modules
|
|
|
|
The test runner (`index.js`) automatically runs all .js files in the
|
|
`web/tests` directory, so you can simply start editing a file
|
|
in that directory to create a new test.
|
|
|
|
## Verifying HTML templates with `mock_template`
|
|
|
|
As a project, we prefer [end-to-end
|
|
testing][testing-philosophy-end-to-end] where possible, since those
|
|
tests are usually both more effective at catching bugs and cheaper to
|
|
maintain than tests that make heavy use of mocks.
|
|
|
|
One place where mocks can often be useful is when testing logic for
|
|
rendering an HTML template in Zulip. The interesting logic that one
|
|
wants to verify can be split between two places:
|
|
|
|
- Computing the **context data** object passed into the HTML template.
|
|
- Conditional logic in the HTML template itself.
|
|
|
|
It can work well to write tests that verify properties of the computed
|
|
HTML template, for example, is a given CSS class present in the
|
|
result.
|
|
|
|
But often, one can write a more readable test by instead verifying
|
|
the values of parameters in the context passed into the template
|
|
rendering. The `mock_template` function in Zulip's testing library
|
|
is designed to support this this.
|
|
|
|
We use `mock_template` in our unit tests to verify that the JS code is
|
|
calling the template with the expected context data. And then we use
|
|
the results of mock_template to supply the JS code with either the
|
|
actual HTML from the template or some kind of zjquery stub.
|
|
|
|
The `mock_template` function accepts 3 parameters:
|
|
|
|
- The path within `web/templates` to the [Handlebars
|
|
template](../subsystems/html-css.md) that you'd like to mock.
|
|
- Whether to call the actual template rendering function so that you
|
|
can verify the HTML generated by this specific template. Since
|
|
Handlebars rendering in tests takes time and rarely catches bugs, we
|
|
recommend using `false` if you're only planning to check the context
|
|
data.
|
|
- A callback function that you can use to include assertions about
|
|
what parameters were passed into the template. This function
|
|
receives a `data` parameter, with the context data, and an `html`
|
|
parameter if the real template was rendered.
|
|
|
|
The following illustrates the two common patterns for using this method.
|
|
|
|
```js
|
|
run_test("test something calling template", ({mock_template}) => {
|
|
mock_template("path/to/template.hbs", false, (data) => {
|
|
assert.deepEqual(data, {...};
|
|
// or assert.deepEqual(data.foo, {...});
|
|
return "stub-for-zjquery";
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
mock_template("path/to/template.hbs", true, (data, html) => {
|
|
assert.deepEqual(data, {...};
|
|
assert.ok(html.startWith(...));
|
|
return html;
|
|
});
|
|
});
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
[testing-philosophy-end-to-end]: https://zulip.readthedocs.io/en/stable/testing/philosophy.html#integration-testing-or-unit-testing
|
|
|
|
## Coverage reports
|
|
|
|
You can automatically generate coverage reports for the JavaScript unit
|
|
tests like this:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
tools/test-js-with-node --coverage
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
If tests pass, you will get instructions to view coverage reports
|
|
in your browser.
|
|
|
|
Note that modules that we don't test _at all_ aren't listed in the
|
|
report, so this tends to overstate how good our overall coverage is,
|
|
but it's accurate for individual files. You can also click a filename
|
|
to see the specific statements and branches not tested. 100% branch
|
|
coverage isn't necessarily possible, but getting to at least 80%
|
|
branch coverage is a good goal.
|
|
|
|
The overall project goal is to get to 100% node test coverage on all
|
|
data/logic modules (UI modules are lower priority for unit testing).
|
|
|
|
## Editor debugger integration
|
|
|
|
Our node test system is pretty simple, and it's possible to configure
|
|
the native debugger features of popular editors to allow stepping
|
|
through the code. Below we document the editors where someone has put
|
|
together detailed instructions for how to do so. Contributions of
|
|
notes for other editors are welcome!
|
|
|
|
## Webstorm integration setup
|
|
|
|
These instructions assume you're using the Vagrant development environment.
|
|
|
|
1. Set up [Vagrant in WebStorm][vagrant-webstorm].
|
|
|
|
2. In WebStorm, navigate to `Preferences -> Tools -> Vagrant` and
|
|
configure the following:
|
|
|
|
- `Instance folder` should be the root of the `zulip` repository on
|
|
your host (where the Vagrantfile is located).
|
|
- `Provider` should be `virtualbox` on macOS and Docker on Linux
|
|
- In `Boxes`, choose the one used for Zulip (unless you use
|
|
Virtualbox for other things, there should only be one option).
|
|
|
|
You shouldn't need to set these additional settings:
|
|
|
|
- `Vagrant executable` should already be correctly `vagrant`.
|
|
- `Environment Variables` is not needed.
|
|
|
|
3. You'll now need to set up a WebStorm "Debug Configuration". Open
|
|
the `Run/Debug Configuration` menu and create a new `Node.js` config:
|
|
1. Under `Node interpreter:` click the 3 dots to the right side and
|
|
click on the little plus in the bottom left of the
|
|
`Node.js Interpreters` window.
|
|
1. Select `Add Remote...`.
|
|
1. In the `Configure Node.js Remote Interpreter`, window select `Vagrant`
|
|
1. Wait for WebStorm to connect to Vagrant. This will be displayed
|
|
by the `Vagrant Host URL` section updating to contain the Vagrant
|
|
SSH URL, e.g. `ssh://vagrant@127.0.0.1:2222`.
|
|
1. **Set the `Node.js interpreter path` to `/usr/local/bin/node`**
|
|
1. Hit `OK` 2 times to get back to the `Run/Debug Configurations` window.
|
|
1. Under `Working Directory` select the root `zulip` directory.
|
|
1. Under `JavaScript file`, enter `web/tests/lib/index.js`
|
|
-- this is the root script for Zulip's node unit tests.
|
|
|
|
Congratulations! You've now set up the integration.
|
|
|
|
## Running tests with the debugger
|
|
|
|
To use Webstorm to debug a given node test file, do the following:
|
|
|
|
1. Under `Application parameters` choose the node test file that you
|
|
are trying to test (e.g. `web/tests/message_store.test.js`).
|
|
1. Under `Path Mappings`, set `Project Root` to `/srv/zulip`
|
|
(i.e. where the `zulip` Git repository is mounted in the Vagrant guest).
|
|
1. Use the WebStorm debugger; see [this overview][webstorm-debugging]
|
|
for details on how to use it.
|
|
|
|
[webstorm-debugging]: https://blog.jetbrains.com/webstorm/2018/01/how-to-debug-with-webstorm/
|
|
[vagrant-webstorm]: https://www.jetbrains.com/help/webstorm/vagrant-support.html?section=Windows%20or%20Linux
|