Refactor: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents from Jest to Vitest #2623
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request modifies the testing setup for the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
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
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
vitest.config.ts (1)
15-18: Consider simplifying the test file patternsThe current configuration adds a specific pattern for UpcomingEvents, but this approach might not scale well as more components are migrated. Consider:
- Standardizing on either
.specor.testextension for all test files- Using a single pattern that covers all test files:
'src/**/*.{spec,test}.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}'This would simplify maintenance and provide consistent coverage for all components.
test: { include: [ - 'src/**/*.spec.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}', - 'src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/*.{spec,test}.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}', + 'src/**/*.{spec,test}.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}', ],src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.test.tsx (3)
24-31: Enhance mock implementation with types and comprehensive coverageWhile the migration to Vitest mocks is correct, consider these improvements:
- Add type safety to the mock
- Include all possible toast methods to prevent runtime errors
import { vi } from 'vitest'; +import type { Toast } from 'react-toastify'; vi.mock('react-toastify', () => ({ toast: { success: vi.fn(), error: vi.fn(), + info: vi.fn(), + warning: vi.fn(), + dismiss: vi.fn(), }, }));
85-91: Consider restructuring router mock for better maintainabilityWhile the async mock works correctly, consider moving it to the top level with other mocks for better organization and consistency.
- beforeAll(() => { - vi.mock('react-router-dom', async () => { - const actual = await vi.importActual('react-router-dom'); - return { - ...actual, - useParams: () => ({ orgId: 'orgId' }), - }; - }); - }); +// Move this to the top with other mocks +vi.mock('react-router-dom', async () => { + const actual = await vi.importActual('react-router-dom'); + return { + ...actual, + useParams: () => ({ orgId: 'orgId' }), + }; +});
Line range hint
193-196: Enhance toast expectations with specific matchersConsider using more specific matchers for toast expectations to ensure exact message matching:
- expect(toast.success).toHaveBeenCalledWith(t.volunteerSuccess); + expect(toast.success).toHaveBeenCalledWith( + t.volunteerSuccess, + expect.any(Object) + ); - expect(toast.error).toHaveBeenCalled(); + expect(toast.error).toHaveBeenCalledWith( + expect.any(String), + expect.any(Object) + );Also applies to: 208-211
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.test.tsx(2 hunks)vitest.config.ts(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.test.tsx (1)
Line range hint 1-211: Migration to Vitest completed successfully
The migration from Jest to Vitest has been implemented correctly. All test cases have been preserved, and the appropriate Vitest equivalents have been used for mocks and assertions. The changes align well with the PR objectives.
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.test.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx (1)
99-99: Consider adding beforeEach cleanup for better test isolationWhile the
afterAllcleanup is correctly migrated to Vitest, consider addingvi.clearAllMocks()in thebeforeEachhook as well. This ensures a clean slate for each test case and prevents any potential interference between tests.beforeEach(() => { + vi.clearAllMocks(); setItem('userId', 'userId'); });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx (3)
24-24: LGTM: Toast mock correctly migrated to Vitest
The migration from Jest to Vitest for the toast mock is implemented correctly, maintaining the same interface while using Vitest's mocking utilities.
Also applies to: 26-29
85-91: Well implemented: Router mock follows Vitest best practices
The router mock implementation is excellent, using the recommended async/await pattern with vi.importActual to preserve the original module's functionality while overriding specific functions.
Line range hint 1-99: Verify test coverage metrics
The test file appears to have comprehensive coverage of component functionality. Let's verify the coverage metrics to ensure they meet the PR objectives.
✅ Verification successful
Test coverage is comprehensive and properly implemented
The test suite demonstrates thorough coverage:
- Toast notifications are properly mocked and assertions are verified for both success and error cases
- All component functionality is tested including:
- Search by event title and location
- Empty state handling
- Error scenarios
- Volunteer actions (individual and group)
- URL parameter validation
- Data fetching errors
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify test coverage for the UpcomingEvents component
# Look for coverage configuration
echo "Checking coverage configuration..."
fd -t f "vitest.config" -x cat {}
# Check if there are any untested code paths
echo "Checking for potential untested scenarios..."
rg -A 2 "toast\." src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.tsx
Length of output: 1335
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the test coverage for toast notifications
# Check test file for toast mocking and assertions
echo "Checking toast assertions in tests..."
rg -A 3 "toast\." "src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx"
# Check test scenarios for success and error cases
echo "Checking test scenarios..."
rg -A 5 "describe|it\(" "src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx"
Length of output: 3232
|
For TS doc check fail you have to add some comments on the top of file. Check merged PR linked in issue for reference |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx (3)
26-32: Add @vitest-environment annotationWhile the documentation is comprehensive, consider adding the
@vitest-environmentannotation at the top to explicitly specify the test environment. This helps with maintainability and clarity./** + * @vitest-environment jsdom * Unit tests for the UpcomingEvents component. * * This file contains tests to verify the functionality and behavior of the UpcomingEvents component * under various scenarios, including successful data fetching, error handling, and user interactions. * Mocked dependencies are used to ensure isolated testing of the component. */
34-38: Enhance mock type-safety and structureConsider restructuring the mock to be more type-safe and explicit:
-vi.mock('react-toastify', () => ({ - toast: { - success: vi.fn(), - error: vi.fn(), - }, -})); +vi.mock('react-toastify', () => ({ + toast: { + success: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => {}), + error: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => {}), + info: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => {}), + warn: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => {}), + }, +}));
107-107: Consider adding additional cleanup methodsWhile
vi.clearAllMocks()is correct, consider adding more comprehensive cleanup for better test isolation:- vi.clearAllMocks(); + vi.clearAllMocks(); + vi.resetAllMocks(); + vi.restoreAllMocks();
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx (2)
93-99: LGTM! Well-implemented router mock
The router mock correctly uses vi.importActual to preserve the actual module functionality while overriding only the necessary functions. This is a good practice that maintains type safety and reduces the risk of breaking changes.
Line range hint 1-1: Verify test coverage metrics
The PR objectives mention maintaining 100% coverage. Let's verify this claim:
✅ Verification successful
Test coverage appears comprehensive and well-maintained
The test suite demonstrates thorough coverage of the UpcomingEvents component with tests for:
- Component rendering and initialization
- Search functionality (by title and location)
- Error states and empty states
- User interactions (volunteering, joining groups)
- Error handling during mutations
- URL parameter validation
- All major component features and edge cases
The test implementation includes proper setup, mocks, and cleanup, with coverage for both success and failure scenarios. The PR's claim of maintaining 100% coverage is supported by the comprehensive test suite.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check test coverage for the UpcomingEvents component
# Note: This assumes vitest coverage configuration is in place
# Search for coverage configuration
echo "Checking coverage configuration..."
rg -l "coverage" -g "vitest.config.*"
# Search for any skipped or focused tests that might affect coverage
echo "Checking for skipped or focused tests..."
rg -n "it\.(skip|only)" src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx
# Search for untested component methods
echo "Checking for potentially untested methods..."
ast-grep --pattern 'export default function UpcomingEvents() {
$$$
}' src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.tsx
Length of output: 562
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the coverage configuration and test implementation more thoroughly
# Check coverage settings in vitest config
echo "Coverage configuration details:"
cat vitest.config.ts
# Check the actual test file content
echo -e "\nTest implementation:"
cat src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.spec.tsx
# Check the component implementation
echo -e "\nComponent implementation:"
cat src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents/UpcomingEvents.tsx
Length of output: 22384
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop-postgres #2623 +/- ##
=====================================================
- Coverage 94.55% 83.81% -10.75%
=====================================================
Files 295 312 +17
Lines 7036 8118 +1082
Branches 1516 1830 +314
=====================================================
+ Hits 6653 6804 +151
- Misses 177 1171 +994
+ Partials 206 143 -63 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Done @varshith257 |
|
What else can I do to make this PR mergeable? @varshith257 |
|
|
palisadoes
merged commit f4aafd7
into
PalisadoesFoundation:develop-postgres
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
This PR migrates the test cases in src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents from Jest to Vitest, ensuring compatibility with Vitest .
✅ Replace Jest-specific functions and mocks with Vitest equivalents
✅ Ensure all tests in src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents 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 #2582
Did you add tests for your changes?
Yes
Snapshots/Videos:
Summary by CodeRabbit
react-toastifyandreact-router-domto align with Vitest standards.