React-testing-library: Simple and Complete React DOM Testing Utilities

React Testing Library 

Simple and complete React DOM testing utilities that encourage good testing practices.

---

The problem

You want to write maintainable tests for your React components. As a part of this goal, you want your tests to avoid including implementation details of your components and rather focus on making your tests give you the confidence for which they are intended. As part of this, you want your testbase to be maintainable in the long run so refactors of your components (changes to implementation but not functionality) don't break your tests and slow you and your team down.

The solution

The React Testing Library is a very lightweight solution for testing React components. It provides light utility functions on top of react-dom and react-dom/test-utils, in a way that encourages better testing practices. Its primary guiding principle is:

The more your tests resemble the way your software is used, the more confidence they can give you.

Installation

This module is distributed via npm which is bundled with node and should be installed as one of your project's devDependencies:

npm install --save-dev @testing-library/react

or

for installation via yarn

yarn add --dev @testing-library/react

This library has peerDependencies listings for react and react-dom.

You may also be interested in installing @testing-library/jest-dom so you can use the custom jest matchers.

Docs

Suppressing unnecessary warnings on React DOM 16.8

There is a known compatibility issue with React DOM 16.8 where you will see the following warning:

Warning: An update to ComponentName inside a test was not wrapped in act(...).

If you cannot upgrade to React DOM 16.9, you may suppress the warnings by adding the following snippet to your test configuration (learn more):

// this is just a little hack to silence a warning that we'll get until we
// upgrade to 16.9. See also: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/14853
const originalError = console.error
beforeAll(() => {
  console.error = (...args) => {
    if (/Warning.*not wrapped in act/.test(args[0])) {
      return
    }
    originalError.call(console, ...args)
  }
})

afterAll(() => {
  console.error = originalError
})

Examples

Basic Example

// hidden-message.js
import * as React from 'react'

// NOTE: React Testing Library works well with React Hooks and classes.
// Your tests will be the same regardless of how you write your components.
function HiddenMessage({children}) {
  const [showMessage, setShowMessage] = React.useState(false)
  return (
    <div>
      <label htmlFor="toggle">Show Message</label>
      <input
        id="toggle"
        type="checkbox"
        onChange={e => setShowMessage(e.target.checked)}
        checked={showMessage}
      />
      {showMessage ? children : null}
    </div>
  )
}

export default HiddenMessage

// __tests__/hidden-message.js
// these imports are something you'd normally configure Jest to import for you
// automatically. Learn more in the setup docs: https://testing-library.com/docs/react-testing-library/setup#cleanup
import '@testing-library/jest-dom'
// NOTE: jest-dom adds handy assertions to Jest and is recommended, but not required

import * as React from 'react'
import {render, fireEvent, screen} from '@testing-library/react'
import HiddenMessage from '../hidden-message'

test('shows the children when the checkbox is checked', () => {
  const testMessage = 'Test Message'
  render(<HiddenMessage>{testMessage}</HiddenMessage>)

  // query* functions will return the element or null if it cannot be found
  // get* functions will return the element or throw an error if it cannot be found
  expect(screen.queryByText(testMessage)).toBeNull()

  // the queries can accept a regex to make your selectors more resilient to content tweaks and changes.
  fireEvent.click(screen.getByLabelText(/show/i))

  // .toBeInTheDocument() is an assertion that comes from jest-dom
  // otherwise you could use .toBeDefined()
  expect(screen.getByText(testMessage)).toBeInTheDocument()
})

Complex Example

// login.js
import * as React from 'react'

function Login() {
  const [state, setState] = React.useReducer((s, a) => ({...s, ...a}), {
    resolved: false,
    loading: false,
    error: null,
  })

  function handleSubmit(event) {
    event.preventDefault()
    const {usernameInput, passwordInput} = event.target.elements

    setState({loading: true, resolved: false, error: null})

    window
      .fetch('/api/login', {
        method: 'POST',
        headers: {'Content-Type': 'application/json'},
        body: JSON.stringify({
          username: usernameInput.value,
          password: passwordInput.value,
        }),
      })
      .then(r => r.json().then(data => (r.ok ? data : Promise.reject(data))))
      .then(
        user => {
          setState({loading: false, resolved: true, error: null})
          window.localStorage.setItem('token', user.token)
        },
        error => {
          setState({loading: false, resolved: false, error: error.message})
        },
      )
  }

  return (
    <div>
      <form onSubmit={handleSubmit}>
        <div>
          <label htmlFor="usernameInput">Username</label>
          <input id="usernameInput" />
        </div>
        <div>
          <label htmlFor="passwordInput">Password</label>
          <input id="passwordInput" type="password" />
        </div>
        <button type="submit">Submit{state.loading ? '...' : null}</button>
      </form>
      {state.error ? <div role="alert">{state.error}</div> : null}
      {state.resolved ? (
        <div role="alert">Congrats! You're signed in!</div>
      ) : null}
    </div>
  )
}

export default Login

// __tests__/login.js
// again, these first two imports are something you'd normally handle in
// your testing framework configuration rather than importing them in every file.
import '@testing-library/jest-dom'
import * as React from 'react'
// import API mocking utilities from Mock Service Worker.
import {rest} from 'msw'
import {setupServer} from 'msw/node'
// import testing utilities
import {render, fireEvent, screen} from '@testing-library/react'
import Login from '../login'

const fakeUserResponse = {token: 'fake_user_token'}
const server = setupServer(
  rest.post('/api/login', (req, res, ctx) => {
    return res(ctx.json(fakeUserResponse))
  }),
)

beforeAll(() => server.listen())
afterEach(() => {
  server.resetHandlers()
  window.localStorage.removeItem('token')
})
afterAll(() => server.close())

test('allows the user to login successfully', async () => {
  render(<Login />)

  // fill out the form
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/username/i), {
    target: {value: 'chuck'},
  })
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/password/i), {
    target: {value: 'norris'},
  })

  fireEvent.click(screen.getByText(/submit/i))

  // just like a manual tester, we'll instruct our test to wait for the alert
  // to show up before continuing with our assertions.
  const alert = await screen.findByRole('alert')

  // .toHaveTextContent() comes from jest-dom's assertions
  // otherwise you could use expect(alert.textContent).toMatch(/congrats/i)
  // but jest-dom will give you better error messages which is why it's recommended
  expect(alert).toHaveTextContent(/congrats/i)
  expect(window.localStorage.getItem('token')).toEqual(fakeUserResponse.token)
})

test('handles server exceptions', async () => {
  // mock the server error response for this test suite only.
  server.use(
    rest.post('/api/login', (req, res, ctx) => {
      return res(ctx.status(500), ctx.json({message: 'Internal server error'}))
    }),
  )

  render(<Login />)

  // fill out the form
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/username/i), {
    target: {value: 'chuck'},
  })
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/password/i), {
    target: {value: 'norris'},
  })

  fireEvent.click(screen.getByText(/submit/i))

  // wait for the error message
  const alert = await screen.findByRole('alert')

  expect(alert).toHaveTextContent(/internal server error/i)
  expect(window.localStorage.getItem('token')).toBeNull()
})

We recommend using Mock Service Worker library to declaratively mock API communication in your tests instead of stubbing window.fetch, or relying on third-party adapters.

More Examples

We're in the process of moving examples to the docs site

You'll find runnable examples of testing with different libraries in the react-testing-library-examples codesandbox. Some included are:

• react-redux
• react-router
• react-context

You can also find React Testing Library examples at react-testing-examples.com.

Hooks

If you are interested in testing a custom hook, check out React Hooks Testing Library.

NOTE: it is not recommended to test single-use custom hooks in isolation from the components where it's being used. It's better to test the component that's using the hook rather than the hook itself. The React Hooks Testing Library is intended to be used for reusable hooks/libraries.

Guiding Principles

The more your tests resemble the way your software is used, the more confidence they can give you.

We try to only expose methods and utilities that encourage you to write tests that closely resemble how your React components are used.

Utilities are included in this project based on the following guiding principles:

1. If it relates to rendering components, it deals with DOM nodes rather than component instances, nor should it encourage dealing with component instances.
2. It should be generally useful for testing individual React components or full React applications. While this library is focused on react-dom, utilities could be included even if they don't directly relate to react-dom.
3. Utility implementations and APIs should be simple and flexible.

Most importantly, we want React Testing Library to be pretty light-weight, simple, and easy to understand.

Docs

Read The Docs | Edit the docs

Issues

Looking to contribute? Look for the Good First Issue label.

🐛 Bugs

Please file an issue for bugs, missing documentation, or unexpected behavior.

See Bugs

💡 Feature Requests

Please file an issue to suggest new features. Vote on feature requests by adding a 👍. This helps maintainers prioritize what to work on.

See Feature Requests

❓ Questions

For questions related to using the library, please visit a support community instead of filing an issue on GitHub.

• Discord
• Stack Overflow

Author: Testing-library
Source Code: https://github.com/testing-library/react-testing-library 
License: MIT license

#react #javascript #testing 

What is GEEK

Buddha Community

How native is React Native? | React Native vs Native App Development

If you are undertaking a mobile app development for your start-up or enterprise, you are likely wondering whether to use React Native. As a popular development framework, React Native helps you to develop near-native mobile apps. However, you are probably also wondering how close you can get to a native app by using React Native. How native is React Native?

In the article, we discuss the similarities between native mobile development and development using React Native. We also touch upon where they differ and how to bridge the gaps. Read on.

A brief introduction to React Native

Let’s briefly set the context first. We will briefly touch upon what React Native is and how it differs from earlier hybrid frameworks.

React Native is a popular JavaScript framework that Facebook has created. You can use this open-source framework to code natively rendering Android and iOS mobile apps. You can use it to develop web apps too.

Facebook has developed React Native based on React, its JavaScript library. The first release of React Native came in March 2015. At the time of writing this article, the latest stable release of React Native is 0.62.0, and it was released in March 2020.

Although relatively new, React Native has acquired a high degree of popularity. The “Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2019” report identifies it as the 8th most loved framework. Facebook, Walmart, and Bloomberg are some of the top companies that use React Native.

The popularity of React Native comes from its advantages. Some of its advantages are as follows:

• Performance: It delivers optimal performance.
• Cross-platform development: You can develop both Android and iOS apps with it. The reuse of code expedites development and reduces costs.
• UI design: React Native enables you to design simple and responsive UI for your mobile app.
• 3rd party plugins: This framework supports 3rd party plugins.
• Developer community: A vibrant community of developers support React Native.

Why React Native is fundamentally different from earlier hybrid frameworks

Are you wondering whether React Native is just another of those hybrid frameworks like Ionic or Cordova? It’s not! React Native is fundamentally different from these earlier hybrid frameworks.

React Native is very close to native. Consider the following aspects as described on the React Native website:

• Access to many native platforms features: The primitives of React Native render to native platform UI. This means that your React Native app will use many native platform APIs as native apps would do.
• Near-native user experience: React Native provides several native components, and these are platform agnostic.
• The ease of accessing native APIs: React Native uses a declarative UI paradigm. This enables React Native to interact easily with native platform APIs since React Native wraps existing native code.

Due to these factors, React Native offers many more advantages compared to those earlier hybrid frameworks. We now review them.

#android app #frontend #ios app #mobile app development #benefits of react native #is react native good for mobile app development #native vs #pros and cons of react native #react mobile development #react native development #react native experience #react native framework #react native ios vs android #react native pros and cons #react native vs android #react native vs native #react native vs native performance #react vs native #why react native #why use react native

Interaction Testing with React Testing Library

Testing is complicated. I’ve certainly never been good at it. For the longest time, I’ve only been focused on basic function input-output unit tests. Why? Because they were easy — you didn’t need to render HTML, you didn’t need to query DOM elements, you didn’t need to interact with said DOM elements. But of course, React component testing is a necessity for any mature codebase. And it finally came time for me to sit down and figure it out.

That’s when I discovered React Testing Library. And suddenly, everything seemingly became much simpler. All the complexities that I’ve encountered, but not understood, that made me put off React component testing disappeared. Hopefully, the same will happen for you.

#react-testing-library #unit-testing #react #jest #interaction-testing

React Testing Library: Simple and Complete React DOM Testing Utilities

React Testing Library

Simple and complete React DOM testing utilities that encourage good testing practices.

Table of Contents

 

• The problem
• The solution
• Installation
  • Suppressing unnecessary warnings on React DOM 16.8
• Examples
  • Basic Example
  • Complex Example
  • More Examples
• Hooks
• Guiding Principles
• Docs
• Issues
  • 🐛 Bugs
  • 💡 Feature Requests
  • ❓ Questions
• Contributors
• LICENSE

The problem

You want to write maintainable tests for your React components. As a part of this goal, you want your tests to avoid including implementation details of your components and rather focus on making your tests give you the confidence for which they are intended. As part of this, you want your testbase to be maintainable in the long run so refactors of your components (changes to implementation but not functionality) don't break your tests and slow you and your team down.

The solution

The React Testing Library is a very lightweight solution for testing React components. It provides light utility functions on top of react-dom and react-dom/test-utils, in a way that encourages better testing practices. Its primary guiding principle is:

The more your tests resemble the way your software is used, the more confidence they can give you.

Installation

This module is distributed via npm which is bundled with node and should be installed as one of your project's devDependencies:

npm install --save-dev @testing-library/react

or

for installation via yarn

yarn add --dev @testing-library/react

This library has peerDependencies listings for react and react-dom.

You may also be interested in installing @testing-library/jest-dom so you can use the custom jest matchers.

Docs

Suppressing unnecessary warnings on React DOM 16.8

There is a known compatibility issue with React DOM 16.8 where you will see the following warning:

Warning: An update to ComponentName inside a test was not wrapped in act(...).

If you cannot upgrade to React DOM 16.9, you may suppress the warnings by adding the following snippet to your test configuration (learn more):

// this is just a little hack to silence a warning that we'll get until we
// upgrade to 16.9. See also: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/14853
const originalError = console.error
beforeAll(() => {
  console.error = (...args) => {
    if (/Warning.*not wrapped in act/.test(args[0])) {
      return
    }
    originalError.call(console, ...args)
  }
})

afterAll(() => {
  console.error = originalError
})

Examples

Basic Example

// hidden-message.js
import * as React from 'react'

// NOTE: React Testing Library works well with React Hooks and classes.
// Your tests will be the same regardless of how you write your components.
function HiddenMessage({children}) {
  const [showMessage, setShowMessage] = React.useState(false)
  return (
    <div>
      <label htmlFor="toggle">Show Message</label>
      <input
        id="toggle"
        type="checkbox"
        onChange={e => setShowMessage(e.target.checked)}
        checked={showMessage}
      />
      {showMessage ? children : null}
    </div>
  )
}

export default HiddenMessage

// __tests__/hidden-message.js
// these imports are something you'd normally configure Jest to import for you
// automatically. Learn more in the setup docs: https://testing-library.com/docs/react-testing-library/setup#cleanup
import '@testing-library/jest-dom'
// NOTE: jest-dom adds handy assertions to Jest and is recommended, but not required

import * as React from 'react'
import {render, fireEvent, screen} from '@testing-library/react'
import HiddenMessage from '../hidden-message'

test('shows the children when the checkbox is checked', () => {
  const testMessage = 'Test Message'
  render(<HiddenMessage>{testMessage}</HiddenMessage>)

  // query* functions will return the element or null if it cannot be found
  // get* functions will return the element or throw an error if it cannot be found
  expect(screen.queryByText(testMessage)).toBeNull()

  // the queries can accept a regex to make your selectors more resilient to content tweaks and changes.
  fireEvent.click(screen.getByLabelText(/show/i))

  // .toBeInTheDocument() is an assertion that comes from jest-dom
  // otherwise you could use .toBeDefined()
  expect(screen.getByText(testMessage)).toBeInTheDocument()
})

Complex Example

// login.js
import * as React from 'react'

function Login() {
  const [state, setState] = React.useReducer((s, a) => ({...s, ...a}), {
    resolved: false,
    loading: false,
    error: null,
  })

  function handleSubmit(event) {
    event.preventDefault()
    const {usernameInput, passwordInput} = event.target.elements

    setState({loading: true, resolved: false, error: null})

    window
      .fetch('/api/login', {
        method: 'POST',
        headers: {'Content-Type': 'application/json'},
        body: JSON.stringify({
          username: usernameInput.value,
          password: passwordInput.value,
        }),
      })
      .then(r => r.json().then(data => (r.ok ? data : Promise.reject(data))))
      .then(
        user => {
          setState({loading: false, resolved: true, error: null})
          window.localStorage.setItem('token', user.token)
        },
        error => {
          setState({loading: false, resolved: false, error: error.message})
        },
      )
  }

  return (
    <div>
      <form onSubmit={handleSubmit}>
        <div>
          <label htmlFor="usernameInput">Username</label>
          <input id="usernameInput" />
        </div>
        <div>
          <label htmlFor="passwordInput">Password</label>
          <input id="passwordInput" type="password" />
        </div>
        <button type="submit">Submit{state.loading ? '...' : null}</button>
      </form>
      {state.error ? <div role="alert">{state.error}</div> : null}
      {state.resolved ? (
        <div role="alert">Congrats! You're signed in!</div>
      ) : null}
    </div>
  )
}

export default Login

// __tests__/login.js
// again, these first two imports are something you'd normally handle in
// your testing framework configuration rather than importing them in every file.
import '@testing-library/jest-dom'
import * as React from 'react'
// import API mocking utilities from Mock Service Worker.
import {rest} from 'msw'
import {setupServer} from 'msw/node'
// import testing utilities
import {render, fireEvent, screen} from '@testing-library/react'
import Login from '../login'

const fakeUserResponse = {token: 'fake_user_token'}
const server = setupServer(
  rest.post('/api/login', (req, res, ctx) => {
    return res(ctx.json(fakeUserResponse))
  }),
)

beforeAll(() => server.listen())
afterEach(() => {
  server.resetHandlers()
  window.localStorage.removeItem('token')
})
afterAll(() => server.close())

test('allows the user to login successfully', async () => {
  render(<Login />)

  // fill out the form
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/username/i), {
    target: {value: 'chuck'},
  })
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/password/i), {
    target: {value: 'norris'},
  })

  fireEvent.click(screen.getByText(/submit/i))

  // just like a manual tester, we'll instruct our test to wait for the alert
  // to show up before continuing with our assertions.
  const alert = await screen.findByRole('alert')

  // .toHaveTextContent() comes from jest-dom's assertions
  // otherwise you could use expect(alert.textContent).toMatch(/congrats/i)
  // but jest-dom will give you better error messages which is why it's recommended
  expect(alert).toHaveTextContent(/congrats/i)
  expect(window.localStorage.getItem('token')).toEqual(fakeUserResponse.token)
})

test('handles server exceptions', async () => {
  // mock the server error response for this test suite only.
  server.use(
    rest.post('/api/login', (req, res, ctx) => {
      return res(ctx.status(500), ctx.json({message: 'Internal server error'}))
    }),
  )

  render(<Login />)

  // fill out the form
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/username/i), {
    target: {value: 'chuck'},
  })
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/password/i), {
    target: {value: 'norris'},
  })

  fireEvent.click(screen.getByText(/submit/i))

  // wait for the error message
  const alert = await screen.findByRole('alert')

  expect(alert).toHaveTextContent(/internal server error/i)
  expect(window.localStorage.getItem('token')).toBeNull()
})

We recommend using Mock Service Worker library to declaratively mock API communication in your tests instead of stubbing window.fetch, or relying on third-party adapters.

More Examples

We're in the process of moving examples to the docs site

You'll find runnable examples of testing with different libraries in the react-testing-library-examples codesandbox. Some included are:

• react-redux
• react-router
• react-context

You can also find React Testing Library examples at react-testing-examples.com.

Hooks

If you are interested in testing a custom hook, check out React Hooks Testing Library.

NOTE: it is not recommended to test single-use custom hooks in isolation from the components where it's being used. It's better to test the component that's using the hook rather than the hook itself. The React Hooks Testing Library is intended to be used for reusable hooks/libraries.

Guiding Principles

The more your tests resemble the way your software is used, the more confidence they can give you.

We try to only expose methods and utilities that encourage you to write tests that closely resemble how your React components are used.

Utilities are included in this project based on the following guiding principles:

1. If it relates to rendering components, it deals with DOM nodes rather than component instances, nor should it encourage dealing with component instances.
2. It should be generally useful for testing individual React components or full React applications. While this library is focused on react-dom, utilities could be included even if they don't directly relate to react-dom.
3. Utility implementations and APIs should be simple and flexible.

Most importantly, we want React Testing Library to be pretty light-weight, simple, and easy to understand.

Docs

Read The Docs | Edit the docs

Issues

Looking to contribute? Look for the Good First Issue label.

🐛 Bugs

Please file an issue for bugs, missing documentation, or unexpected behavior.

See Bugs

💡 Feature Requests

Please file an issue to suggest new features. Vote on feature requests by adding a 👍. This helps maintainers prioritize what to work on.

See Feature Requests

❓ Questions

For questions related to using the library, please visit a support community instead of filing an issue on GitHub.

• Discord
• Stack Overflow

---

Author: testing-library
Source Code: https://github.com/testing-library/react-testing-library
License: MIT license

#react-native #react 

Test Driven Development (TDD) with React Testing Library & Mock Service Worker

Let’s step up our testing game with two useful libraries that lend themselves excellently to a TDD approach.

Setting up

Whenever I want to try out something React-related, I use the library create-react-app. It gives you a ready-to-work-with basic React application with no configuration needed. Recent versions also come bundled with React Testing Library, so if you use the latest create-react-app, you can start using React Testing Library straight away. If not — install @testing-library/react and @testing-library/jest-dom in your existing React application.

I am going to implement the following functionality: a simple recipe list with a search function. It will look something like this to a user in a mobile browser:

Image credits: Burger Photo by Robin Stickel on Unsplash, French Toast Photo by Joseph Gonzalez on Unsplash, Salmon Photo by Casey Lee on Unsplash

Starting with a failing test

I want to use a TDD approach, so let’s start with a failing test. At this point, there is no component yet, so of course whatever test we write is going to fail. But let’s start small; I want a component named ‘Recipes’ that renders the expected heading text. Here is my test for that expectation:

	import React from 'react';
	import { render, screen } from '@testing-library/react';

	test('renders the heading', () => {
	  render(<Recipes />);

	  expect(screen.getByRole('heading')).toHaveTextContent('Recipe Finder');
	});

React testing library exports a render method, which will render a component and all of its child components. It also exports a screen object, holding a number of queries we can use to select different elements in our rendered component (and its child components too). The **getByRole **query lets me select the heading element and make an assertion on its text content.

Why select the heading element by its role and not for example a CSS class? The guiding principle of React Testing Library is “The more your tests resemble the way your software is used, the more confidence they can give you.” Therefore, we want to write our tests as close as possible to how the ultimate tester — the end user — will be using the application. Users don’t see CSS classes or data attributes; they interact with text, label text and semantic elements and roles. Using queries such as getByRole also encourages us to write accessible code, since these selectors are available to everyone, including users of screen readers.

Making the test pass

Our first test fails as expected.** Recipes is not defined.** But this is the first step in TDD — a failing test. Now, let’s make it pass by writing the simplest possible component with the correct heading and then importing it in our test file. Now, let’s re-run the test. It passes!

	import React from 'react';

	const Recipes = () => {
	  return (
	    <div>
	      <h1>Recipe Finder</h1>
	    </div>
	  )
	};

	export default Recipes;

Using further queries, we can make similar expectations for the input element and the “Find” button. The button also has a role, but for the input field, I will use the getByPlaceholderText query, since that is probably the closest query to how the user would find it on the page.

Start with a failing test…

	import React from 'react';
	import { render, screen } from '@testing-library/react';
	import Recipes from './Recipes';

	test('renders the heading, input field and button', () => {
	  render(<Recipes />);

	  expect(screen.getByRole('heading')).toHaveTextContent('Recipe Finder');
	  expect(screen.getByPlaceholderText('Enter an ingredient to find recipes...'))
	    .toBeInTheDocument();
	  expect(screen.getByRole('button')).toHaveTextContent('Find');
	});

… and implement the changes necessary to make it pass:

	import React from 'react';

	const Recipes = () => {
	  return (
	    <div>
	      <h1>Recipe Finder</h1>
	      <form>
	        <input 
	          type="text" 
	          name="ingredient"
	          placeholder="Enter an ingredient to find recipes..." 
	        />
	        <button type="submit">Find</button>
	      </form>
	    </div>
	  )
	};

	export default Recipes;

This way, we know what we expect from our code and more importantly — we will know if we break any functionality if the previously passing tests suddenly fail.

An important step in TDD is the refactor step, where we improve our code to for example make it easier to read, become more efficient and remove any duplication. The test should still pass after we refactor.

Setting up our mocks

When the application first renders, I want to display a list of all my recipes, just like in the visual design above. This requires some kind of communication with an API. We are going to use Mock Service Worker to mock the HTTP-requests, so that we can control the response data. Install Mock Service Worker with npm like this:

npm install msw --save-dev

With Mock Service Worker, we are not mocking a specific module (unlike if we were to use Jest.mock), which means that it makes no difference if I use fetch or a third-party library such as axios to get the data. This makes it incredibly flexible. Let’s add the following imports to our test file:

import { rest } from 'msw';
import { setupServer } from 'msw/node';

Here is how I set up mocking a call to the recipe list endpoint:

	import React from 'react';
	import { render, screen } from '@testing-library/react';
	import Recipes from './Recipes';
	import { rest } from 'msw';
	import { setupServer } from 'msw/node';

	const allRecipes = [
	  { id: 1, title: 'Burger' }, 
	  { id: 2, title: 'French toast' }, 
	  { id: 3, title: 'Salmon' }
	];

	const server = setupServer(
	  rest.get('/api/recipes', (req, res, ctx) => {
	    return res(ctx.json({ recipes: allRecipes }));
	  })
	);

	beforeAll(() => server.listen());

afterAll(() => server.close());

If you have worked with NodeJS and Express, the syntax looks very familiar. GET requests to ‘/api/recipes’ will respond with JSON containing the allRecipes array, just like a real API would. These two lines make sure the server starts listening (intercepting) before the tests run and closes its connection when the tests in this file have finished running:

beforeAll(() => server.listen());
afterAll(() => server.close());

#tdd #react-testing-library #react #test-driven-development #testing

React-testing-library: Simple and Complete React DOM Testing Utilities

React Testing Library 

Simple and complete React DOM testing utilities that encourage good testing practices.

---

The problem

You want to write maintainable tests for your React components. As a part of this goal, you want your tests to avoid including implementation details of your components and rather focus on making your tests give you the confidence for which they are intended. As part of this, you want your testbase to be maintainable in the long run so refactors of your components (changes to implementation but not functionality) don't break your tests and slow you and your team down.

The solution

The React Testing Library is a very lightweight solution for testing React components. It provides light utility functions on top of react-dom and react-dom/test-utils, in a way that encourages better testing practices. Its primary guiding principle is:

The more your tests resemble the way your software is used, the more confidence they can give you.

Installation

This module is distributed via npm which is bundled with node and should be installed as one of your project's devDependencies:

npm install --save-dev @testing-library/react

or

for installation via yarn

yarn add --dev @testing-library/react

This library has peerDependencies listings for react and react-dom.

You may also be interested in installing @testing-library/jest-dom so you can use the custom jest matchers.

Docs

Suppressing unnecessary warnings on React DOM 16.8

There is a known compatibility issue with React DOM 16.8 where you will see the following warning:

Warning: An update to ComponentName inside a test was not wrapped in act(...).

If you cannot upgrade to React DOM 16.9, you may suppress the warnings by adding the following snippet to your test configuration (learn more):

// this is just a little hack to silence a warning that we'll get until we
// upgrade to 16.9. See also: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/14853
const originalError = console.error
beforeAll(() => {
  console.error = (...args) => {
    if (/Warning.*not wrapped in act/.test(args[0])) {
      return
    }
    originalError.call(console, ...args)
  }
})

afterAll(() => {
  console.error = originalError
})

Examples

Basic Example

// hidden-message.js
import * as React from 'react'

// NOTE: React Testing Library works well with React Hooks and classes.
// Your tests will be the same regardless of how you write your components.
function HiddenMessage({children}) {
  const [showMessage, setShowMessage] = React.useState(false)
  return (
    <div>
      <label htmlFor="toggle">Show Message</label>
      <input
        id="toggle"
        type="checkbox"
        onChange={e => setShowMessage(e.target.checked)}
        checked={showMessage}
      />
      {showMessage ? children : null}
    </div>
  )
}

export default HiddenMessage

// __tests__/hidden-message.js
// these imports are something you'd normally configure Jest to import for you
// automatically. Learn more in the setup docs: https://testing-library.com/docs/react-testing-library/setup#cleanup
import '@testing-library/jest-dom'
// NOTE: jest-dom adds handy assertions to Jest and is recommended, but not required

import * as React from 'react'
import {render, fireEvent, screen} from '@testing-library/react'
import HiddenMessage from '../hidden-message'

test('shows the children when the checkbox is checked', () => {
  const testMessage = 'Test Message'
  render(<HiddenMessage>{testMessage}</HiddenMessage>)

  // query* functions will return the element or null if it cannot be found
  // get* functions will return the element or throw an error if it cannot be found
  expect(screen.queryByText(testMessage)).toBeNull()

  // the queries can accept a regex to make your selectors more resilient to content tweaks and changes.
  fireEvent.click(screen.getByLabelText(/show/i))

  // .toBeInTheDocument() is an assertion that comes from jest-dom
  // otherwise you could use .toBeDefined()
  expect(screen.getByText(testMessage)).toBeInTheDocument()
})

Complex Example

// login.js
import * as React from 'react'

function Login() {
  const [state, setState] = React.useReducer((s, a) => ({...s, ...a}), {
    resolved: false,
    loading: false,
    error: null,
  })

  function handleSubmit(event) {
    event.preventDefault()
    const {usernameInput, passwordInput} = event.target.elements

    setState({loading: true, resolved: false, error: null})

    window
      .fetch('/api/login', {
        method: 'POST',
        headers: {'Content-Type': 'application/json'},
        body: JSON.stringify({
          username: usernameInput.value,
          password: passwordInput.value,
        }),
      })
      .then(r => r.json().then(data => (r.ok ? data : Promise.reject(data))))
      .then(
        user => {
          setState({loading: false, resolved: true, error: null})
          window.localStorage.setItem('token', user.token)
        },
        error => {
          setState({loading: false, resolved: false, error: error.message})
        },
      )
  }

  return (
    <div>
      <form onSubmit={handleSubmit}>
        <div>
          <label htmlFor="usernameInput">Username</label>
          <input id="usernameInput" />
        </div>
        <div>
          <label htmlFor="passwordInput">Password</label>
          <input id="passwordInput" type="password" />
        </div>
        <button type="submit">Submit{state.loading ? '...' : null}</button>
      </form>
      {state.error ? <div role="alert">{state.error}</div> : null}
      {state.resolved ? (
        <div role="alert">Congrats! You're signed in!</div>
      ) : null}
    </div>
  )
}

export default Login

// __tests__/login.js
// again, these first two imports are something you'd normally handle in
// your testing framework configuration rather than importing them in every file.
import '@testing-library/jest-dom'
import * as React from 'react'
// import API mocking utilities from Mock Service Worker.
import {rest} from 'msw'
import {setupServer} from 'msw/node'
// import testing utilities
import {render, fireEvent, screen} from '@testing-library/react'
import Login from '../login'

const fakeUserResponse = {token: 'fake_user_token'}
const server = setupServer(
  rest.post('/api/login', (req, res, ctx) => {
    return res(ctx.json(fakeUserResponse))
  }),
)

beforeAll(() => server.listen())
afterEach(() => {
  server.resetHandlers()
  window.localStorage.removeItem('token')
})
afterAll(() => server.close())

test('allows the user to login successfully', async () => {
  render(<Login />)

  // fill out the form
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/username/i), {
    target: {value: 'chuck'},
  })
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/password/i), {
    target: {value: 'norris'},
  })

  fireEvent.click(screen.getByText(/submit/i))

  // just like a manual tester, we'll instruct our test to wait for the alert
  // to show up before continuing with our assertions.
  const alert = await screen.findByRole('alert')

  // .toHaveTextContent() comes from jest-dom's assertions
  // otherwise you could use expect(alert.textContent).toMatch(/congrats/i)
  // but jest-dom will give you better error messages which is why it's recommended
  expect(alert).toHaveTextContent(/congrats/i)
  expect(window.localStorage.getItem('token')).toEqual(fakeUserResponse.token)
})

test('handles server exceptions', async () => {
  // mock the server error response for this test suite only.
  server.use(
    rest.post('/api/login', (req, res, ctx) => {
      return res(ctx.status(500), ctx.json({message: 'Internal server error'}))
    }),
  )

  render(<Login />)

  // fill out the form
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/username/i), {
    target: {value: 'chuck'},
  })
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByLabelText(/password/i), {
    target: {value: 'norris'},
  })

  fireEvent.click(screen.getByText(/submit/i))

  // wait for the error message
  const alert = await screen.findByRole('alert')

  expect(alert).toHaveTextContent(/internal server error/i)
  expect(window.localStorage.getItem('token')).toBeNull()
})

We recommend using Mock Service Worker library to declaratively mock API communication in your tests instead of stubbing window.fetch, or relying on third-party adapters.

More Examples

We're in the process of moving examples to the docs site

You'll find runnable examples of testing with different libraries in the react-testing-library-examples codesandbox. Some included are:

• react-redux
• react-router
• react-context

You can also find React Testing Library examples at react-testing-examples.com.

Hooks

If you are interested in testing a custom hook, check out React Hooks Testing Library.

NOTE: it is not recommended to test single-use custom hooks in isolation from the components where it's being used. It's better to test the component that's using the hook rather than the hook itself. The React Hooks Testing Library is intended to be used for reusable hooks/libraries.

Guiding Principles

The more your tests resemble the way your software is used, the more confidence they can give you.

We try to only expose methods and utilities that encourage you to write tests that closely resemble how your React components are used.

Utilities are included in this project based on the following guiding principles:

1. If it relates to rendering components, it deals with DOM nodes rather than component instances, nor should it encourage dealing with component instances.
2. It should be generally useful for testing individual React components or full React applications. While this library is focused on react-dom, utilities could be included even if they don't directly relate to react-dom.
3. Utility implementations and APIs should be simple and flexible.

Most importantly, we want React Testing Library to be pretty light-weight, simple, and easy to understand.

Docs

Read The Docs | Edit the docs

Issues

Looking to contribute? Look for the Good First Issue label.

🐛 Bugs

Please file an issue for bugs, missing documentation, or unexpected behavior.

See Bugs

💡 Feature Requests

Please file an issue to suggest new features. Vote on feature requests by adding a 👍. This helps maintainers prioritize what to work on.

See Feature Requests

❓ Questions

For questions related to using the library, please visit a support community instead of filing an issue on GitHub.

• Discord
• Stack Overflow

Author: Testing-library
Source Code: https://github.com/testing-library/react-testing-library 
License: MIT license

#react #javascript #testing