Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

test_runner: refactor mock_loader #54223

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 21, 2024

Conversation

aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95 aduh95 commented Aug 6, 2024

It seems the mock_loader can be greatly simplified if it doesn't try to support things Node.js doesn't support (e.g. importing a path, we only support importing URLs), and do not need to rely too much on internals.

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Review requested:

  • @nodejs/test_runner

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. test Issues and PRs related to the tests. test_runner Issues and PRs related to the test runner subsystem. labels Aug 6, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 6, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.31%. Comparing base (68e94c1) to head (ac0933b).
Report is 336 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #54223   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.31%   87.31%           
=======================================
  Files         648      648           
  Lines      182362   182336   -26     
  Branches    34986    34980    -6     
=======================================
- Hits       159229   159212   -17     
+ Misses      16398    16392    -6     
+ Partials     6735     6732    -3     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
lib/internal/test_runner/mock/loader.js 95.52% <100.00%> (-0.62%) ⬇️
lib/internal/test_runner/mock/mock.js 99.25% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

... and 24 files with indirect coverage changes

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Aug 6, 2024

importing a path, we only support importing URLs

Can you clarify this? From what I can tell, dynamic import does work with paths.

> await import('./foo.mjs')
[Module: null prototype] { foo: { foo: 1 } }

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 6, 2024

Can you clarify this? From what I can tell, dynamic import does work with paths.

In the example you give here (import("./foo.mjs")), you're passing a relative URL, not a path. As long as you are not on Windows and the path you're using does not contain any special char (such as %, ?, #, etc.), a relative path can serves as a relative URL, hence the confusion I suppose – also, an absolute Unix path can serve as a origin-relative URL as long as no special char are in use.

/// Assuming path of the current module is /tmp/entry.mjs

await import('./foo?test.js'); // Would attempt to load /tmp/foo with import.meta.url being file:///tmp/foo?test.js
await import('./foo%3Ftest.js'); // Would attempt to load /tmp/foo?test.js with import.meta.url being file:///tmp/foo%3Ftest.js

await import('/path/to/file#1.js'); // Would try to load /path/to/file with import.meta.url being file:///path/to/file#1.js
await import('/path/to/file%231.js'); // Would try to load /path/to/file#1.js with import.meta.url being file:///path/to/file%231.js

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Aug 6, 2024

Another question: if this is only an internal refactor/simplification, I would expect the existing tests to continue working. Why are all of the changes to the test file required?

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 6, 2024

Another question: if this is only an internal refactor/simplification, I would expect the existing tests to continue working. Why are all of the changes to the test file required?

That's fair, let's move the test refactor to a dedicated PR (#54233)

Copy link
Contributor

@cjihrig cjihrig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM if the CI passes.

@aduh95 aduh95 force-pushed the refactor-mock_loader branch from d8ed05d to e5acdee Compare August 6, 2024 22:00
@aduh95 aduh95 added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. labels Aug 6, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Aug 6, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@aduh95 aduh95 removed the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Aug 7, 2024
@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 7, 2024

So it breaks on Windows – but IMO that's because the tests are wrong, importing a Windows path is not supposed to work.

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Aug 7, 2024

importing a Windows path is not supposed to work

I ran into a similar issue when originally developing the feature. The tests only broke on Windows when I tried to implement things more cleanly. I assumed that importing a Windows path was supposed to work because in the tests, code like this works without any mocks configured:

const fixture = fixtures.path('module-mocking', 'basic-esm.mjs');
const original = await import(fixture);

Maybe it's possible that the code only loads because the mock loader is enabled, even with no mocks configured. If the test is wrong and the code doesn't load without the mock loader, then we should drop the invalid test(s) or even add a test to make sure it never works with the mock loader.

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 7, 2024

I assumed that importing a Windows path was supposed to work because in the tests, code like this works without any mocks configured:

const fixture = fixtures.path('module-mocking', 'basic-esm.mjs');
const original = await import(fixture);

Are you sure? It seems like somthing that shouldn't work. IIRC you should get Unknown protocol c: or something like that.

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Aug 7, 2024

I edited my comment, but what might be happening is that the mock loader is enabled and even though no modules are mocked, the resolve() function is allowing those Windows paths to be loaded. I don't have access to Windows to verify, but if you're confident that it shouldn't work, I'm OK with updating those tests.

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 7, 2024

Let me validate that once I get a hand on a Windows machine.

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 7, 2024

I tried reproducing on 22.6.0 on Windows. Both node --experimental-test-module-mocks -e "import(path.resolve('file.mjs'))" and node -e "import(path.resolve('file.mjs'))" report the error I was mentioning earlier (Only URLs with a scheme file, data, and node are supported […]. Received protocol 'c:'). I tried adding the test runner to the mix, but that didn't change anything. Mocking the path would then make the import succeeds, but that's because the mock loader interferes with the usual resolve algorithm.

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 7, 2024

I suggest we land #54233, then I can add a Windows-only test case in this PR that validates passing a path to import results in a rejected promise.

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Aug 7, 2024

SGTM. Thanks!

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Aug 16, 2024

@aduh95 I think this is ready for the change you proposed in #54223 (comment).

@aduh95 aduh95 force-pushed the refactor-mock_loader branch from e5acdee to db0e8e2 Compare August 16, 2024 21:15
@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor Author

aduh95 commented Aug 16, 2024

It looks like it's not possible to support t.mock.module(somePath) with my changes (at least on Windows). IMO we should make it support only URLs, that way it's consistent on all OSes, and consistent with import() – and let's be real, for most cases, URLs and paths are indistinguishable from each other. I'll open a separate PR for that.

@aduh95 aduh95 force-pushed the refactor-mock_loader branch from 64babf7 to ac0933b Compare August 20, 2024 17:47
@aduh95 aduh95 added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. labels Aug 20, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Aug 20, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Copy link
Contributor

@cjihrig cjihrig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Still LGTM since I guess the commit queue needs a reapproval.

@aduh95 aduh95 added the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Aug 21, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added commit-queue-failed An error occurred while landing this pull request using GitHub Actions. and removed commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. labels Aug 21, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Commit Queue failed
- Loading data for nodejs/node/pull/54223
✔  Done loading data for nodejs/node/pull/54223
----------------------------------- PR info ------------------------------------
Title      test_runner: refactor `mock_loader` (#54223)
   ⚠  Could not retrieve the email or name of the PR author's from user's GitHub profile!
Branch     aduh95:refactor-mock_loader -> nodejs:main
Labels     test, author ready, needs-ci, test_runner
Commits    2
 - test_runner: refactor `mock_loader`
 - squash! add Windows-only test
Committers 1
 - Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/54223
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <moshe@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
------------------------------ Generated metadata ------------------------------
PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/54223
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <moshe@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   ℹ  This PR was created on Tue, 06 Aug 2024 09:37:08 GMT
   ✔  Approvals: 5
   ✔  - Yagiz Nizipli (@anonrig) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/54223#pullrequestreview-2221307097
   ✔  - Colin Ihrig (@cjihrig): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/54223#pullrequestreview-2250956747
   ✔  - Chemi Atlow (@atlowChemi): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/54223#pullrequestreview-2222805845
   ✔  - Moshe Atlow (@MoLow) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/54223#pullrequestreview-2230052660
   ✔  - James M Snell (@jasnell) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/54223#pullrequestreview-2231864401
   ✔  Last GitHub CI successful
   ℹ  Last Full PR CI on 2024-08-20T17:54:28Z: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/61294/
- Querying data for job/node-test-pull-request/61294/
   ✔  Last Jenkins CI successful
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   ✔  No git cherry-pick in progress
   ✔  No git am in progress
   ✔  No git rebase in progress
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Bringing origin/main up to date...
From https://github.com/nodejs/node
 * branch                  main       -> FETCH_HEAD
✔  origin/main is now up-to-date
- Downloading patch for 54223
From https://github.com/nodejs/node
 * branch                  refs/pull/54223/merge -> FETCH_HEAD
✔  Fetched commits as cc26951180e6..ac0933b2ab3b
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[main f1e95b31b5] test_runner: refactor `mock_loader`
 Author: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
 Date: Sat Aug 3 14:30:47 2024 +0200
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
[main d4e46cdcd7] squash! add Windows-only test
 Author: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
 Date: Fri Aug 16 23:57:03 2024 +0200
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
   ✔  Patches applied
Please run the following commands to complete landing

$ git rebase origin/main --no-keep-empty -i -x "git node land --amend" --autosquash
$ git node land --continue

https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/10492400336

@aduh95 aduh95 added commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. commit-queue-squash Add this label to instruct the Commit Queue to squash all the PR commits into the first one. and removed commit-queue-failed An error occurred while landing this pull request using GitHub Actions. labels Aug 21, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Aug 21, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot merged commit b4344cf into nodejs:main Aug 21, 2024
67 checks passed
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Landed in b4344cf

@aduh95 aduh95 deleted the refactor-mock_loader branch August 21, 2024 15:46
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 25, 2024
PR-URL: #54223
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <moshe@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
@RafaelGSS RafaelGSS mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2024
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 30, 2024
PR-URL: #54223
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <moshe@atlow.co.il>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
@targos targos added the dont-land-on-v20.x PRs that should not land on the v20.x-staging branch and should not be released in v20.x. label Sep 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. commit-queue-squash Add this label to instruct the Commit Queue to squash all the PR commits into the first one. dont-land-on-v20.x PRs that should not land on the v20.x-staging branch and should not be released in v20.x. needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. test_runner Issues and PRs related to the test runner subsystem. test Issues and PRs related to the tests.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants