Stubbing a nested function in Jest
I have two functions in a module at the module scope. One of the functions is used by another.
async function allCinemas( puppeteer, states )
const cinemaDetails = ;
const page = await puppeteer
.launch(
handleSIGINT: true /*devtools: false,headless: true*/
)
.then(browser => browser.newPage());
await page.setViewport( width: 1366, height: 735 ); //form factor - laptop/PC
await page.goto("https://www.somesite.come");
for (const state of states)
const res = await cinemasfromState(page, state);
res.forEach(cin =>
cinemaDetails.push(cin);
);
await page.close();
return cinemaDetails;
async function cinemasfromState(page, state)
const CINEMA_SELECTOR = `div[$[STATE]] div.top-select-option h.element`;
let res = await page.evaluate(
(elementPath, state) =>
let results = Array.from(document.querySelectorAll(elementPath)).map(
function(cin, index)
let result =
cinemaState: this.state,
cinemaId: cin.getAttribute("id"),
cinemaName: cin.getAttribute("name"),
;
return result;
,
state
);
return [...results.reduce((a, c) => a.set(c.cinemaId, c), new Map()).values()];
,
CINEMA_SELECTOR.replace("$[STATE]", state),
state
);
return Promise.resolve(res);
export allCinemas, cinemasfromState ;
I have separately tested function cinemasfromState
Therefore when I test function allCinemas
, I am thinking of stubbing function cinemasfromState
.
How can I not stub/mock cinemasfromState
so that I don’t have to duplicate testing?
javascript unit-testing jestjs
add a comment |
I have two functions in a module at the module scope. One of the functions is used by another.
async function allCinemas( puppeteer, states )
const cinemaDetails = ;
const page = await puppeteer
.launch(
handleSIGINT: true /*devtools: false,headless: true*/
)
.then(browser => browser.newPage());
await page.setViewport( width: 1366, height: 735 ); //form factor - laptop/PC
await page.goto("https://www.somesite.come");
for (const state of states)
const res = await cinemasfromState(page, state);
res.forEach(cin =>
cinemaDetails.push(cin);
);
await page.close();
return cinemaDetails;
async function cinemasfromState(page, state)
const CINEMA_SELECTOR = `div[$[STATE]] div.top-select-option h.element`;
let res = await page.evaluate(
(elementPath, state) =>
let results = Array.from(document.querySelectorAll(elementPath)).map(
function(cin, index)
let result =
cinemaState: this.state,
cinemaId: cin.getAttribute("id"),
cinemaName: cin.getAttribute("name"),
;
return result;
,
state
);
return [...results.reduce((a, c) => a.set(c.cinemaId, c), new Map()).values()];
,
CINEMA_SELECTOR.replace("$[STATE]", state),
state
);
return Promise.resolve(res);
export allCinemas, cinemasfromState ;
I have separately tested function cinemasfromState
Therefore when I test function allCinemas
, I am thinking of stubbing function cinemasfromState
.
How can I not stub/mock cinemasfromState
so that I don’t have to duplicate testing?
javascript unit-testing jestjs
Could you please add more precise code snippet. This one is missing the export statements so its quite hard to get say how to mock something.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:59
@AndreasKöberle, apologies for the brevity.. code updated
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:47
add a comment |
I have two functions in a module at the module scope. One of the functions is used by another.
async function allCinemas( puppeteer, states )
const cinemaDetails = ;
const page = await puppeteer
.launch(
handleSIGINT: true /*devtools: false,headless: true*/
)
.then(browser => browser.newPage());
await page.setViewport( width: 1366, height: 735 ); //form factor - laptop/PC
await page.goto("https://www.somesite.come");
for (const state of states)
const res = await cinemasfromState(page, state);
res.forEach(cin =>
cinemaDetails.push(cin);
);
await page.close();
return cinemaDetails;
async function cinemasfromState(page, state)
const CINEMA_SELECTOR = `div[$[STATE]] div.top-select-option h.element`;
let res = await page.evaluate(
(elementPath, state) =>
let results = Array.from(document.querySelectorAll(elementPath)).map(
function(cin, index)
let result =
cinemaState: this.state,
cinemaId: cin.getAttribute("id"),
cinemaName: cin.getAttribute("name"),
;
return result;
,
state
);
return [...results.reduce((a, c) => a.set(c.cinemaId, c), new Map()).values()];
,
CINEMA_SELECTOR.replace("$[STATE]", state),
state
);
return Promise.resolve(res);
export allCinemas, cinemasfromState ;
I have separately tested function cinemasfromState
Therefore when I test function allCinemas
, I am thinking of stubbing function cinemasfromState
.
How can I not stub/mock cinemasfromState
so that I don’t have to duplicate testing?
javascript unit-testing jestjs
I have two functions in a module at the module scope. One of the functions is used by another.
async function allCinemas( puppeteer, states )
const cinemaDetails = ;
const page = await puppeteer
.launch(
handleSIGINT: true /*devtools: false,headless: true*/
)
.then(browser => browser.newPage());
await page.setViewport( width: 1366, height: 735 ); //form factor - laptop/PC
await page.goto("https://www.somesite.come");
for (const state of states)
const res = await cinemasfromState(page, state);
res.forEach(cin =>
cinemaDetails.push(cin);
);
await page.close();
return cinemaDetails;
async function cinemasfromState(page, state)
const CINEMA_SELECTOR = `div[$[STATE]] div.top-select-option h.element`;
let res = await page.evaluate(
(elementPath, state) =>
let results = Array.from(document.querySelectorAll(elementPath)).map(
function(cin, index)
let result =
cinemaState: this.state,
cinemaId: cin.getAttribute("id"),
cinemaName: cin.getAttribute("name"),
;
return result;
,
state
);
return [...results.reduce((a, c) => a.set(c.cinemaId, c), new Map()).values()];
,
CINEMA_SELECTOR.replace("$[STATE]", state),
state
);
return Promise.resolve(res);
export allCinemas, cinemasfromState ;
I have separately tested function cinemasfromState
Therefore when I test function allCinemas
, I am thinking of stubbing function cinemasfromState
.
How can I not stub/mock cinemasfromState
so that I don’t have to duplicate testing?
javascript unit-testing jestjs
javascript unit-testing jestjs
edited Nov 12 '18 at 11:47
Theepan Thevathasasn
asked Nov 12 '18 at 4:36
Theepan ThevathasasnTheepan Thevathasasn
5819
5819
Could you please add more precise code snippet. This one is missing the export statements so its quite hard to get say how to mock something.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:59
@AndreasKöberle, apologies for the brevity.. code updated
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:47
add a comment |
Could you please add more precise code snippet. This one is missing the export statements so its quite hard to get say how to mock something.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:59
@AndreasKöberle, apologies for the brevity.. code updated
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:47
Could you please add more precise code snippet. This one is missing the export statements so its quite hard to get say how to mock something.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:59
Could you please add more precise code snippet. This one is missing the export statements so its quite hard to get say how to mock something.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:59
@AndreasKöberle, apologies for the brevity.. code updated
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:47
@AndreasKöberle, apologies for the brevity.. code updated
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:47
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
As long as both function are defined in the same module there is no sane way to mock only one function that is then used by the other function is the module. Maybe it becomes clear why if you think about the order the code is executed.
- Inside the module the two functions
A
andB
are declared. FunctionB
has reference to functionA
. - The module is imported into your test. At this point in time there is no way to remove the reference to
A
inside ofB
.
So the only solution to test this two functions with mocking one of them is to put them in differnt modules, as you can easily mock one of them in the test. As you export both of them it should be quite easy to put them in different modules.
Cool. If I do that, could you please recommend a code skeleton organise the test ?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 21:38
add a comment |
Use sinon
While testing b
, you should test for its behavior on different responses from a
(happy and fail flows). So you need to stub a
with different returns to test b
correctly.
import * as allMethods from './whereever-the-file-is';
import sinon from 'sinon';
// inside your test case
const aStub = sinon.stub(allMethods, 'a');
aStub.returns('x');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'x'
aStub.returns('y');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'y'
I haven't tested this code, so pl refer to official docs if you need to know more about sinon stubs.
Are you that this will work. The only think it does is to overwritea
in the context of your importedallMethods
variable in the test. This will not affect the one that is used byb
in the file itself.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:58
@Dinesh, would be great if you could help me understand how this will help me intercept the code?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:49
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53256031%2fstubbing-a-nested-function-in-jest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As long as both function are defined in the same module there is no sane way to mock only one function that is then used by the other function is the module. Maybe it becomes clear why if you think about the order the code is executed.
- Inside the module the two functions
A
andB
are declared. FunctionB
has reference to functionA
. - The module is imported into your test. At this point in time there is no way to remove the reference to
A
inside ofB
.
So the only solution to test this two functions with mocking one of them is to put them in differnt modules, as you can easily mock one of them in the test. As you export both of them it should be quite easy to put them in different modules.
Cool. If I do that, could you please recommend a code skeleton organise the test ?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 21:38
add a comment |
As long as both function are defined in the same module there is no sane way to mock only one function that is then used by the other function is the module. Maybe it becomes clear why if you think about the order the code is executed.
- Inside the module the two functions
A
andB
are declared. FunctionB
has reference to functionA
. - The module is imported into your test. At this point in time there is no way to remove the reference to
A
inside ofB
.
So the only solution to test this two functions with mocking one of them is to put them in differnt modules, as you can easily mock one of them in the test. As you export both of them it should be quite easy to put them in different modules.
Cool. If I do that, could you please recommend a code skeleton organise the test ?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 21:38
add a comment |
As long as both function are defined in the same module there is no sane way to mock only one function that is then used by the other function is the module. Maybe it becomes clear why if you think about the order the code is executed.
- Inside the module the two functions
A
andB
are declared. FunctionB
has reference to functionA
. - The module is imported into your test. At this point in time there is no way to remove the reference to
A
inside ofB
.
So the only solution to test this two functions with mocking one of them is to put them in differnt modules, as you can easily mock one of them in the test. As you export both of them it should be quite easy to put them in different modules.
As long as both function are defined in the same module there is no sane way to mock only one function that is then used by the other function is the module. Maybe it becomes clear why if you think about the order the code is executed.
- Inside the module the two functions
A
andB
are declared. FunctionB
has reference to functionA
. - The module is imported into your test. At this point in time there is no way to remove the reference to
A
inside ofB
.
So the only solution to test this two functions with mocking one of them is to put them in differnt modules, as you can easily mock one of them in the test. As you export both of them it should be quite easy to put them in different modules.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 19:37
Andreas KöberleAndreas Köberle
47.6k39177235
47.6k39177235
Cool. If I do that, could you please recommend a code skeleton organise the test ?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 21:38
add a comment |
Cool. If I do that, could you please recommend a code skeleton organise the test ?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 21:38
Cool. If I do that, could you please recommend a code skeleton organise the test ?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 21:38
Cool. If I do that, could you please recommend a code skeleton organise the test ?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 21:38
add a comment |
Use sinon
While testing b
, you should test for its behavior on different responses from a
(happy and fail flows). So you need to stub a
with different returns to test b
correctly.
import * as allMethods from './whereever-the-file-is';
import sinon from 'sinon';
// inside your test case
const aStub = sinon.stub(allMethods, 'a');
aStub.returns('x');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'x'
aStub.returns('y');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'y'
I haven't tested this code, so pl refer to official docs if you need to know more about sinon stubs.
Are you that this will work. The only think it does is to overwritea
in the context of your importedallMethods
variable in the test. This will not affect the one that is used byb
in the file itself.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:58
@Dinesh, would be great if you could help me understand how this will help me intercept the code?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:49
add a comment |
Use sinon
While testing b
, you should test for its behavior on different responses from a
(happy and fail flows). So you need to stub a
with different returns to test b
correctly.
import * as allMethods from './whereever-the-file-is';
import sinon from 'sinon';
// inside your test case
const aStub = sinon.stub(allMethods, 'a');
aStub.returns('x');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'x'
aStub.returns('y');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'y'
I haven't tested this code, so pl refer to official docs if you need to know more about sinon stubs.
Are you that this will work. The only think it does is to overwritea
in the context of your importedallMethods
variable in the test. This will not affect the one that is used byb
in the file itself.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:58
@Dinesh, would be great if you could help me understand how this will help me intercept the code?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:49
add a comment |
Use sinon
While testing b
, you should test for its behavior on different responses from a
(happy and fail flows). So you need to stub a
with different returns to test b
correctly.
import * as allMethods from './whereever-the-file-is';
import sinon from 'sinon';
// inside your test case
const aStub = sinon.stub(allMethods, 'a');
aStub.returns('x');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'x'
aStub.returns('y');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'y'
I haven't tested this code, so pl refer to official docs if you need to know more about sinon stubs.
Use sinon
While testing b
, you should test for its behavior on different responses from a
(happy and fail flows). So you need to stub a
with different returns to test b
correctly.
import * as allMethods from './whereever-the-file-is';
import sinon from 'sinon';
// inside your test case
const aStub = sinon.stub(allMethods, 'a');
aStub.returns('x');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'x'
aStub.returns('y');
// test your function b on what it should do when a returns 'y'
I haven't tested this code, so pl refer to official docs if you need to know more about sinon stubs.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 5:42
Dinesh PandiyanDinesh Pandiyan
2,465925
2,465925
Are you that this will work. The only think it does is to overwritea
in the context of your importedallMethods
variable in the test. This will not affect the one that is used byb
in the file itself.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:58
@Dinesh, would be great if you could help me understand how this will help me intercept the code?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:49
add a comment |
Are you that this will work. The only think it does is to overwritea
in the context of your importedallMethods
variable in the test. This will not affect the one that is used byb
in the file itself.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:58
@Dinesh, would be great if you could help me understand how this will help me intercept the code?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:49
Are you that this will work. The only think it does is to overwrite
a
in the context of your imported allMethods
variable in the test. This will not affect the one that is used by b
in the file itself.– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:58
Are you that this will work. The only think it does is to overwrite
a
in the context of your imported allMethods
variable in the test. This will not affect the one that is used by b
in the file itself.– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:58
@Dinesh, would be great if you could help me understand how this will help me intercept the code?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:49
@Dinesh, would be great if you could help me understand how this will help me intercept the code?
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:49
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53256031%2fstubbing-a-nested-function-in-jest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Could you please add more precise code snippet. This one is missing the export statements so its quite hard to get say how to mock something.
– Andreas Köberle
Nov 12 '18 at 8:59
@AndreasKöberle, apologies for the brevity.. code updated
– Theepan Thevathasasn
Nov 12 '18 at 11:47