Refactor : Vitest to src/state/*

[shivasankaran18]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Added Vitest to src/state/*

Issue Number: 2787

Fixes #2787

Did you add tests for your changes?
Yes

Snapshots/Videos:

If relevant, did you update the documentation?

Summary

Migrated the testing framework to Vitest.
Updated all test files and configurations to be compatible with Vitest's syntax and features.

Have you read the contributing guide?

Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Updated mock function creation in tests from jest to vitest.
  • Improved clarity in action object creation and added assertions for type and payload properties.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request involves refactoring test files in the src/state directory from Jest to Vitest. Specifically, two test files (src/state/action-creators/index.spec.ts and src/state/helpers/Action.spec.ts) have been updated to use Vitest's mocking and testing syntax. The changes primarily focus on replacing Jest-specific mock functions with Vitest equivalents and making minor improvements to test case clarity.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/state/action-creators/index.spec.ts	Replaced jest.fn() with vi.fn() for creating mock functions in test cases
src/state/helpers/Action.spec.ts	Improved test case by introducing a variable for object creation and adding explicit property assertions

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Replace Jest-specific functions with Vitest equivalents [#2787]	✅
Rename test files to .spec.* suffix [#2787]	✅
Ensure tests pass using npm run test:vitest [#2787]	❓	Requires verification during test run
Maintain 100% test coverage [#2787]	❓	Requires coverage report verification

Possibly related issues

• Refactor: src/components/AddOn/support/services/Plugin.helper.test.ts from Jest to Vitest #2477: Similar Vitest refactoring for Plugin.helper.test.ts
• Refactor: src/components/AddOn/support/components/Action/Action.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2474: Vitest migration for Action.test.tsx
• Refactor : src/components/AddOn/core/AddOnStore/AddOnStore.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest  #2480: Vitest refactoring for AddOnStore.test.tsx

Possibly related PRs

• Refactored src/components/AddOn/support/components/Action/Action.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2482: Refactoring tests from Jest to Vitest
• Refactor: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/Actions from Jest to Vitest #2619: Transitioning tests to Vitest
• Refactor:src/screens/UserPortal/Events from Jest to Vitest  #2639: Updating test mocking methods

Suggested labels

refactor

Suggested reviewers

• palisadoes

Poem

🐰 Hopping through the code with glee,
Jest to Vitest, a testing spree!
Mock functions dance, tests now shine bright,
Refactoring code with rabbit delight!
Vitest magic, our test suite's might! 🧪

Tip

CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command @coderabbitai generate docstrings to have CodeRabbit automatically generate docstrings for your pull request. We would love to hear your feedback on Discord.

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 471f113 and 3fb4721.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/state/action-creators/index.spec.ts (5 hunks)
• src/state/helpers/Action.spec.ts (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Learnings (1)

📓 Common learnings

Learnt from: bitbard3
PR: PalisadoesFoundation/talawa-admin#2588
File: src/components/ChangeLanguageDropdown/ChangeLanguageDropdown.spec.tsx:145-155
Timestamp: 2024-12-02T04:20:11.745Z
Learning: In PRs focused solely on refactoring test cases from Jest to Vitest, avoid suggesting optimizations or changes outside the migration scope.

🔇 Additional comments (7)

src/state/helpers/Action.spec.ts (2)

4-7: Good use of explicit typing.

Defining the object separately and casting it to InterfaceAction clarifies the purpose of each property.

---

9-10: Well-structured test.

These expectations clearly validate both type and payload in a straightforward manner.

src/state/action-creators/index.spec.ts (5)

1-1: Successful import of vitest utilities.

Replacing jest with vi is correct for Vitest migration.

---

14-14: Proper usage of vitest mock.

Using vi.fn() ensures the function is correctly tracked during tests.

---

24-24: Proper usage of vitest mock.

Same pattern here; consistent and clean approach.

---

34-34: Proper usage of vitest mock.

Continues the correct approach of migrating mocks from Jest to Vitest.

---

44-44: Proper usage of vitest mock.

All dispatch testing blocks now use Vitest mocks consistently.

---

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?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
   1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
   1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
   2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
   3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.82%. Comparing base (471f113) to head (3fb4721).
Report is 9 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #2870       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage             63.58%   87.82%   +24.24%     
=====================================================
  Files                   296      313       +17     
  Lines                  7371     8224      +853     
  Branches               1610     1799      +189     
=====================================================
+ Hits                   4687     7223     +2536     
+ Misses                 2451      802     -1649     
+ Partials                233      199       -34     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.