Include fullName in formattedAssertion

[aifreedom]

Summary
Reinstate of #3378 with added tests.

This PR adds an additional field fullName to FormattedAssertionResult.

When we try to analyze the test result json, we find that two it test cases under different describe block in one test file are rendered the same in the json report. Including the full name help solving this issue.

Test plan

• Unit test
• Manual test output

...
    "testResults": [
        {
            "assertionResults": [
                {
                    "failureMessages": [],
                    "fullName": "Header renders",
                    "status": "passed",
                    "title": "renders"
                },
                {
                    "failureMessages": [],
                    "fullName": "Header renders <Element /> with right props",
                    "status": "passed",
                    "title": "renders <Element /> with right props"
                }
            ],
            "endTime": 1493233733071,
            "message": "",
            "name": "/path/to/the/test/file.js",
            "startTime": 1493233730480,
            "status": "passed",
            "summary": ""
        }
    ],
...

[gdborton]

Shouldn't this be using underscores to match packages/jest-util/src/format_test_results.js?

[aifreedom]

The source file's name is formatTestResults.js while lint asks me to snake_case the test file. Not sure what's the right way to unify them..

[cpojer]

I think you can rename that file.

[cpojer]

Wait, what? The source file on latest master is format_test_results.js, so I'm not sure if I understand that comment.

[aifreedom]

Hmm, I didn't notice that after I rebase. If that's the case, how come the require worked??

[cpojer]

Ah, because this was called _test but we only look for .test files, so this wasn't actually run. I'll fix it.

[cpojer]

I'll figure out what's wrong with the tests and the require name.

[cpojer]

Thank you for following up on this and sending a PR. I apologize for closing the initial PR. I think I was pretty stressed out then and didn't have a lot of time reviewing this properly :)

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.