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

Migrated src/components/EventStats/* from Jest to Vitest #2997

Conversation

PratapRathi
Copy link
Contributor

@PratapRathi PratapRathi commented Dec 28, 2024

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
This PR will migrate src/components/EventStats/* from Jest to Vitest

Issue Number:
Fixes #2794

Did you add tests for your changes?
Yes

Snapshots/Videos:

Screenshot 2024-12-28 at 17 41 50

If relevant, did you update the documentation?
No

Summary
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No

Other information
N/A

Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Migrated test files from Jest to Vitest testing framework across multiple components.
    • Updated test syntax and mocking methods to align with Vitest conventions.
    • Replaced test functions with it for more descriptive test case naming.
    • Updated import statements to use Vitest testing utilities.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 28, 2024

Walkthrough

This pull request focuses on migrating test files within the src/components/EventStats directory from Jest to Vitest. The changes involve updating import statements, replacing Jest-specific mocking and testing functions with their Vitest equivalents, and renaming test files from .test.tsx to .spec.tsx. The modifications maintain the existing test logic while transitioning to the Vitest testing framework.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/components/EventStats/EventStats.spec.tsx Migrated from Jest to Vitest, updated imports, mocking, and test function syntax
src/components/EventStats/EventStatsWrapper.spec.tsx Transitioned testing framework, updated mocking and test function calls
src/components/EventStats/Statistics/AverageRating.spec.tsx Replaced Jest imports with Vitest, updated test function from test to it
src/components/EventStats/Statistics/Feedback.spec.tsx Migrated mocking and test functions to Vitest syntax
src/components/EventStats/Statistics/Review.spec.tsx Updated imports and test function syntax to Vitest

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Replace Jest-specific functions with Vitest equivalents [#2794]
Rename test files from .test.* to .spec.* [#2794]
Ensure tests pass using npm run test:vitest [#2794] Requires actual test run verification
Maintain 100% test coverage [#2794] Requires coverage report verification

Possibly related issues

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • palisadoes

Poem

🐰 Hopping through test files with glee,
Jest is old, Vitest sets us free!
Mocks and functions, a brand new dance,
Code evolves with each small chance.
Testing rabbits, rejoice today! 🧪


📜 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 666457d and 8edf455.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/components/EventStats/EventStatsWrapper.spec.tsx (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • src/components/EventStats/EventStatsWrapper.spec.tsx

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
🪧 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.

Copy link

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

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/components/EventStats/EventStatsWrapper.spec.tsx (1)

9-14: Fix typo in comment while implementation LGTM

The mock implementation correctly uses Vitest's vi.mock with async import. However, there's a typo in the comment: "trasformer" should be "transformer".

-// Mock the modules for PieChart rendering as they require a trasformer being used (which is not done by Vitest)
+// Mock the modules for PieChart rendering as they require a transformer being used (which is not done by Vitest)
📜 Review details

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

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c5a3000 and 666457d.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)
  • src/components/EventStats/EventStats.spec.tsx (2 hunks)
  • src/components/EventStats/EventStatsWrapper.spec.tsx (2 hunks)
  • src/components/EventStats/Statistics/AverageRating.spec.tsx (2 hunks)
  • src/components/EventStats/Statistics/Feedback.spec.tsx (3 hunks)
  • src/components/EventStats/Statistics/Review.spec.tsx (3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (3)
📓 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.
src/components/EventStats/EventStats.spec.tsx (1)
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.
src/components/EventStats/Statistics/Feedback.spec.tsx (1)
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 (15)
src/components/EventStats/Statistics/AverageRating.spec.tsx (2)

10-10: Migration to Vitest imports looks good.

These new imports from "vitest" are correctly replacing the Jest analogs.


39-39: Use of 'it' instead of 'test' is appropriate.

This aligns with Vitest's recommended style.

src/components/EventStats/EventStats.spec.tsx (4)

7-7: Switch to Vitest imports is valid.

Good job updating the import to ensure Vitest test functions are used.


9-15: Mocking with 'vi.mock' is correct.

These changes accurately replace Jest mocking with Vitest’s approach.


48-48: Replacing 'jest.fn()' with 'vi.fn()' is consistent.

All references to Jest mocks are successfully swapped to Vitest.


51-51: Use of 'it' in place of 'test'.

This completes the framework migration for this file.

src/components/EventStats/Statistics/Review.spec.tsx (3)

10-10: Vitest imports are correct.

Imports from "vitest" conform to the new testing framework.


55-55: Refactor from 'test' to 'it'.

This usage aligns with Vitest conventions.


76-76: Another instance of 'test' → 'it'.

Consistent with the Vitest migration.

src/components/EventStats/Statistics/Feedback.spec.tsx (4)

10-10: Adding 'vi', 'describe', 'expect', and 'it' from Vitest is appropriate.

Smooth transition to Vitest's suite of test functions.


12-17: Replacing 'jest.mock()' with 'vi.mock()'.

This mocking approach correctly aligns with Vitest.


57-57: Use of 'it' for the test block.

The function name now meets Vitest best practices.


84-84: Another 'it' test block conversion.

All test blocks here are now properly migrated to Vitest spells.

src/components/EventStats/EventStatsWrapper.spec.tsx (2)

7-7: LGTM: Correct Vitest imports

The import statement correctly includes the necessary Vitest testing utilities.


57-57: LGTM: Correct migration to Vitest's it

The test case has been correctly migrated from Jest's test to Vitest's it while maintaining the original test logic.

src/components/EventStats/EventStatsWrapper.spec.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 28, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.91%. Comparing base (c5a3000) to head (8edf455).
Report is 1 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files
@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #2997       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage             33.14%   88.91%   +55.77%     
=====================================================
  Files                   299      320       +21     
  Lines                  7429     8290      +861     
  Branches               1624     1869      +245     
=====================================================
+ Hits                   2462     7371     +4909     
+ Misses                 4762      696     -4066     
- Partials                205      223       +18     

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

@palisadoes palisadoes merged commit c310730 into PalisadoesFoundation:develop-postgres Dec 28, 2024
14 checks passed
@PratapRathi PratapRathi deleted the Refactor--src/components/EventStats/-from-Jest-to-Vitest branch December 28, 2024 15:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants