Handle arrays when merging snapshots #7089

timtrinidad · 2018-10-02T17:06:48Z

Summary

#6455 fixes properties in an object being left out of the snapshot if they are not specified in propertyMatchers by merging the matchers and the received snapshot.

However, arrays are not being merged so fields are being left out in the snapshot. For example:

const result = {
  data: {
    one: 'one',
    two: 'two',
    three: [
      {
        four: 'four',
        five: 'five',
      },
    ],
  }
}

expect(result).toMatchSnapshot({
  data: {
    two: expect.any(String),
    three: [
      {
        four: expect.any(String),
      },
    ],
  },
});

Expected Snapshot:

exports[`snapshot 1`] = `
Object {
  "data": Object {
    "one": "one",
    "three": Array [
      Object {
        "five": "five", // <-- Missing from "Actual"
        "four": Any<String>,
      },
    ],
    "two": Any<String>,
  },
}
`;

Actual snapshot:

exports[`snapshot 1`] = `
Object {
  "data": Object {
    "one": "one",
    "three": Array [
      Object {
        "four": Any<String>,
      },
    ],
    "two": Any<String>,
  },
}
`;

Test plan

The test case has been updated to include an array to be merged for testing deepMerge.

facebook-github-bot · 2018-10-02T17:06:54Z

Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't seem to have you on file. In order for us to review and merge your code, please sign up at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need the corporate CLA signed.

If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at cla@fb.com. Thanks!

facebook-github-bot · 2018-10-02T20:09:43Z

Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Facebook open source project. Thanks!

SimenB · 2018-10-18T16:25:17Z

@rickhanlonii mind reviewing this?

thymikee · 2018-10-30T15:48:03Z

packages/jest-snapshot/src/utils.js

@@ -185,6 +185,15 @@ export const deepMerge = (target: any, source: any) => {
      if (isObject(source[key]) && !source[key].$$typeof) {
        if (!(key in target)) Object.assign(mergedOutput, {[key]: source[key]});
        else mergedOutput[key] = deepMerge(target[key], source[key]);
+      } else if (Array.isArray(source[key])) {
+        // Convert arrays to objects, merge, convert back to array


Sounds expensive. Can we instead make deepMergeArray similar to what we have in deepCyclicCopy.js?
https://github.com/facebook/jest/blob/fb61bfffb803bad0c2ff9ab1798a6c4c31cb14fa/packages/jest-util/src/deepCyclicCopy.js#L83-L105

rickhanlonii · 2018-12-02T15:13:04Z

Hey @timtrinidad, sorry for the delay

I think we can close this if we do #7128 instead

cc @thymikee

timtrinidad · 2018-12-02T15:31:07Z

Thanks for looking at this! I think #7128 is still different - the snapshot test in this issue only includes asymmetric matchers.

rickhanlonii · 2018-12-02T16:00:25Z

Ah, yes I understand now, thanks @timtrinidad

rickhanlonii

Agree with @thymikee that we should use deepMergeArray, and the changelog needs fixed, then this can go 👍

Sorry again for the delay

rickhanlonii · 2018-12-02T16:01:42Z

packages/jest-snapshot/src/__tests__/utils.test.js

@@ -195,12 +195,57 @@ test('serialize handles \\r\\n', () => {

 describe('DeepMerge', () => {
  it('Correctly merges objects with property matchers', () => {
-    const target = {data: {bar: 'bar', foo: 'foo'}};
+    /* eslint-disable sort-keys */
+    // to keep keys in numerical order rather than alphabetical


Are you just adding a missing test or is this a changed behavior?

This is adding a missing test for the case of nested matchers.

timtrinidad · 2018-12-03T19:50:25Z

packages/jest-snapshot/src/__tests__/utils.test.js

+            four: 'four',
+            five: 'five',
+          },
+          // Include an array element not present in the propertyMatchers


I added an extra array element to ensure behavior between differently-sized arrays works as expected

timtrinidad · 2018-12-03T19:51:19Z

packages/jest-snapshot/src/__tests__/utils.test.js

+    };
+    // Don't use `expect.any(string)` since that will cause a false positive
+    // if deepMerge incorrectly keeps two as 'two' from the target
+    const matcher = '--matcher--';


This was originally const matcher = expect.any(string), but when messing with util.deepMerge() I noticed if I just return the target unmodified, this returned a false positive.

timtrinidad · 2018-12-03T19:52:44Z

packages/jest-snapshot/src/utils.js

@@ -178,13 +178,32 @@ export const saveSnapshotFile = (
  );
 };

+const deepMergeArray = (target, source) => {


Inspired by the deepmerge documentation.

I looked at replacing util.deepMerge() with that npm package since it's already used indirectly by jest-website, but it looks like we had to implement the array merging logic manually either way.

SimenB · 2018-12-25T11:28:55Z

@rickhanlonii ping :)

yofriadi · 2019-02-18T02:45:20Z

Hi guys, when will this get merged, I've been waiting for months, thank you :)

packages/jest-snapshot/src/__tests__/utils.test.js

… instead of a dummy matcher

codecov-io · 2019-04-22T16:36:55Z

Codecov Report

Merging #7089 into master will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 63.63%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #7089      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   62.22%   62.22%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files         266      266              
  Lines       10720    10731      +11     
  Branches     2609     2611       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         6670     6677       +7     
- Misses       3463     3465       +2     
- Partials      587      589       +2

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
packages/jest-snapshot/src/utils.ts	`88.31% <63.63%> (-4.12%)`	⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 65b48a7...1dada66. Read the comment docs.

timtrinidad · 2019-04-22T19:16:55Z

packages/jest-snapshot/src/utils.ts

@@ -185,8 +185,6 @@ const deepMergeArray = (target: Array<any>, source: Array<any>) => {
  source.forEach((element, index) => {
    if (typeof mergedOutput[index] === 'undefined') {
      mergedOutput[index] = element;
-    } else if (typeof element === 'undefined') {


In adding tests to cover this line, I realized that this case really shouldn't happen (i.e. source having an array element that's undefined)

jeysal

Nice work @timtrinidad!
Sorry this was left open so long, and thanks for your swift responses after Simen brought this up again :)

scotthovestadt · 2019-05-01T19:07:56Z

I have to revert this PR for now. It introduces a simple regression around strings being converted to objects, which I took the time to fix here scotthovestadt@3fd5434 but it also introduces a regression around breaking expect.any(...) matchers within arrays, which looks like a more complicated fix. We're doing a release soon and I don't have enough confidence that any fix I do will be sufficient.

Happy to have this merged in once it doesn't break those use-cases.

pedrottimark

Nevermind. I was in the wrong place when I did this.

)

SimenB · 2019-05-01T20:05:36Z

@timtrinidad the revert included regression tests, so if you feel up for it I'd love a new PR landing this 🙂

timtrinidad · 2019-05-01T21:42:02Z

This updated PR (#8408) checks specifically for arrays of arrays and arrays of scalars. The various tests were also split into cases for readability and DRYness.

joartola · 2019-06-11T17:09:52Z

Is this issue fixed? If it is, in what version of jest was fixed?

timtrinidad · 2019-06-11T17:22:51Z

Not yet - PR #8408 is still open.

github-actions · 2021-05-11T18:13:11Z

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.

SimenB requested a review from rickhanlonii October 2, 2018 18:15

facebook-github-bot added the cla signed label Oct 2, 2018

thymikee reviewed Oct 30, 2018

View reviewed changes

rickhanlonii requested changes Dec 2, 2018

View reviewed changes

Tim Trinidad added 3 commits December 3, 2018 13:45

add support for arrays when merging snapshots

6534d09

update README

4fb1c1a

compare array by keys without converting to object

079fa50

timtrinidad commented Dec 3, 2018

View reviewed changes

yofriadi mentioned this pull request Apr 22, 2019

Snapshot inconsistencies when working with nested property matchers #8151

Closed

SimenB requested review from jeysal, rickhanlonii, scotthovestadt and thymikee April 22, 2019 13:57

jeysal reviewed Apr 22, 2019

View reviewed changes

packages/jest-snapshot/src/__tests__/utils.test.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Tim Trinidad added 6 commits April 22, 2019 11:25

add support for arrays when merging snapshots

7317c0d

update README

ac1974c

compare array by keys without converting to object

1942422

Merge branch 'master' of github.com:timtrinidad/jest

bf0534b

jest-snapshot: fix ts errors in utils

a22721f

jest-snapshot: use assert.deepStrictEqual to allow expect.any(String)…

1dada66

… instead of a dummy matcher

jest-snapshot: add test for more array elements in source than target

0926357

timtrinidad commented Apr 22, 2019

View reviewed changes

SimenB approved these changes Apr 22, 2019

View reviewed changes

jeysal approved these changes Apr 22, 2019

View reviewed changes

SimenB merged commit 7e1e3f8 into jestjs:master Apr 22, 2019

scotthovestadt added a commit to scotthovestadt/jest that referenced this pull request May 1, 2019

Revert jestjs#7089 and add tests to catch the regression in the future.

573a80f

scotthovestadt mentioned this pull request May 1, 2019

Revert #7089 and add tests to catch the regression(s) in the future. #8405

Merged

pedrottimark reviewed May 1, 2019

View reviewed changes

scotthovestadt added a commit that referenced this pull request May 1, 2019

Revert #7089 and add tests to catch the regression in the future. (#8405

9081612

)

timtrinidad pushed a commit to timtrinidad/jest that referenced this pull request May 1, 2019

Reapply jestjs#7089

1a3b280

timtrinidad mentioned this pull request May 1, 2019

Reapply #7089 and handle arrays of primitives/arrays #8408

Merged

SimenB pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 13, 2019

Reapply #7089 and handle arrays of primitives/arrays (#8408)

62ca17c

snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Sep 2, 2019

[Snyk] Upgrade jest from 24.8.0 to 24.9.0 iliutastoica/30-seconds-of-angular#3

Open

snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2019

[Snyk] Upgrade babel-jest from 24.0.0 to 24.9.0 jakeherp/burger-builder#14

Open

This was referenced Mar 21, 2020

[Snyk] Upgrade: jest, jest-cli lwojcik/sc2pte-panel-frontend#88

Closed

[Snyk] Upgrade jest from 24.0.0 to 24.9.0 DavidKindler/burger-builder#47

Merged

github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 11, 2021

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Handle arrays when merging snapshots #7089

Handle arrays when merging snapshots #7089

timtrinidad commented Oct 2, 2018

facebook-github-bot commented Oct 2, 2018

facebook-github-bot commented Oct 2, 2018

SimenB commented Oct 18, 2018

thymikee Oct 30, 2018

rickhanlonii commented Dec 2, 2018

timtrinidad commented Dec 2, 2018 •

edited

Loading

rickhanlonii commented Dec 2, 2018

rickhanlonii left a comment

rickhanlonii Dec 2, 2018

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

SimenB commented Dec 25, 2018

yofriadi commented Feb 18, 2019

codecov-io commented Apr 22, 2019

timtrinidad Apr 22, 2019

jeysal left a comment

scotthovestadt commented May 1, 2019 •

edited

Loading

pedrottimark left a comment •

edited

Loading

SimenB commented May 1, 2019

timtrinidad commented May 1, 2019

joartola commented Jun 11, 2019

timtrinidad commented Jun 11, 2019

github-actions bot commented May 11, 2021

Handle arrays when merging snapshots #7089

Handle arrays when merging snapshots #7089

Conversation

timtrinidad commented Oct 2, 2018

Summary

Test plan

facebook-github-bot commented Oct 2, 2018

facebook-github-bot commented Oct 2, 2018

SimenB commented Oct 18, 2018

thymikee Oct 30, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rickhanlonii commented Dec 2, 2018

timtrinidad commented Dec 2, 2018 • edited Loading

rickhanlonii commented Dec 2, 2018

rickhanlonii left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rickhanlonii Dec 2, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

timtrinidad Dec 3, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SimenB commented Dec 25, 2018

yofriadi commented Feb 18, 2019

codecov-io commented Apr 22, 2019

Codecov Report

timtrinidad Apr 22, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jeysal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

scotthovestadt commented May 1, 2019 • edited Loading

pedrottimark left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SimenB commented May 1, 2019

timtrinidad commented May 1, 2019

joartola commented Jun 11, 2019

timtrinidad commented Jun 11, 2019

github-actions bot commented May 11, 2021

timtrinidad commented Dec 2, 2018 •

edited

Loading

scotthovestadt commented May 1, 2019 •

edited

Loading

pedrottimark left a comment •

edited

Loading