stage | start-date | release-date | release-versions | teams | prs | project-link | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
recommended |
2017-06-13 00:00:00 UTC |
2018-02-13 00:00:00 UTC |
|
|
|
In order to embrace newer features being added by QUnit (our chosen default
testing framework), we need to reduce the brittle coupling between ember-qunit
and QUnit itself.
This RFC proposes a new testing syntax, that will expose QUnit API directly while also making tests much easier to understand.
QUnit feature development has been accelerating since the ramp up to QUnit 2.0.
A number of new features have been added that make testing our applications
much easier, but the current structure of ember-qunit
impedes our ability
to take advantage of some of these features.
Developers are often confused by our moduleFor*
APIs, questions like these
are very common:
- What "magic" is
ember-qunit
doing? - Where are the lines between QUnit and ember-qunit?
- How can I use QUnit for plain JS objects?
The way that ember-qunit
wraps QUnit functionality makes the division
of responsiblity much harder to understand, and leads folks to believe that there
is much more going on in ember-qunit
than there is. It should be much clearer
what ember-qunit
is responsible for and what we rely on QUnit for.
This RFC also aims to remove a number of custom testing only APIs that exist today
(largely because the container/registry system was completely private when the
current tools were authored). Instead of things like this.subject
, this.register
,
this.inject
, or this.lookup
we can rely on the standard way of performing these
functions in Ember via the owner API.
When this RFC has been implemented and rolled out, these questions should all be addressed and our testing system will both: embrace QUnit much more and be much more framework agnostic, all the while dropping custom testing only APIs in favor of public APIs that work across tests and app code.
Sounds like a neat trick, huh?
The primary change being proposed in this RFC is to migrate to using the QUnit nested module syntax, and update our custom setup/teardown into a more functional API.
Lets look at a basic example:
// **** before ****
import { moduleForComponent, test } from 'ember-qunit';
import hbs from 'htmlbars-inline-precompile';
moduleForComponent('x-foo', {
integration: true
});
test('renders', function(assert) {
assert.expect(1);
this.render(hbs`{{pretty-color name="red"}}`);
assert.equal(this.$('.color-name').text(), 'red');
});
// **** after ****
import { module, test } from 'qunit';
import { setupRenderingTest } from 'ember-qunit';
import hbs from 'htmlbars-inline-precompile';
module('x-foo', function(hooks) {
setupRenderingTest(hooks);
test('renders', async function(assert) {
assert.expect(1);
await this.render(hbs`{{pretty-color name="red"}}`);
assert.equal(this.$('.color-name').text(), 'red');
});
});
As you can see, this proposal leverages QUnit's nested module API in a way that
makes it much clearer what is going on. It is quite obvious what QUnit is doing
(acting like a general testing framework) and what ember-qunit
is doing
(setting up rendering functionality).
This API was heavily influenced by the work that Tobias Bieniek did in emberjs/ember-mocha#84.
Even though it is not a proposal of this RFC, the QUnit nested module syntax may seem foreign to some folks so lets briefly review.
With nested modules, a normal 1.x QUnit module setup changes from:
QUnit.module('some description', {
before() {},
beforeEach() {},
afterEach() {},
after() {}
});
QUnit.test('it blends', function(assert) {
assert.ok(true, 'of course!');
});
Into:
QUnit.module('some description', function(hooks) {
hooks.before(() => {});
hooks.beforeEach(() => {});
hooks.afterEach(() => {});
hooks.after(() => {});
QUnit.test('it blends', function(assert) {
assert.ok(true, 'of course!');
});
});
This makes it much simpler to support multiple before
, beforeEach
, afterEach
,
and after
callbacks, and it also allows for arbitrary nesting of modules.
You can read more about QUnit nested modules here. The new APIs proposed in this RFC expect to be leveraging nested modules.
The following new methods will be exposed from ember-qunit
:
interface QUnitModuleHooks {
before(callback: Function): void;
beforeEach(callback: Function): void;
afterEach(callback: Function): void;
after(callback: Function): void;
}
declare module 'ember-qunit' {
// ...snip...
export function setupTest(hooks: QUnitModuleHooks): void;
export function setupRenderingTest(hooks: QUnitModuleHooks): void;
}
This function will:
- invoke
ember-test-helper
ssetContext
with the tests context - create an owner object and set it on the test context (e.g.
this.owner
) - setup
this.set
,this.setProperties
,this.get
, andthis.getProperties
to the test context - setup
this.pauseTest
andthis.resumeTest
methods to allow easy pausing/resuming of tests
This function will:
- run the
setupTest
implementation - setup
this.$
method to run jQuery selectors rooted to the testing container - setup a getter for
this.element
which returns the DOM element representing the element that was rendered viathis.render
- setup Ember's renderer and create a
this.render
method which accepts a compiled template to render and returns a promise which resolves once rendering is completed - setup
this.clearRender
method which clears any previously rendered DOM ( also used during cleanup)
When invoked, this.render
will render the provided template and return a
promise that resolves when rendering is completed.
Here is a brief list of the more important but possibly understated changes being proposed here:
- the various setup methods no longer need to know the name of the object under test
this.subject
is removed in favor of using the standard public API for looking up and creating instances (this.owner.lookup
andthis.owner.factoryFor
)this.inject
is removed in favor of usingthis.owner.lookup
directlythis.register
is removed in favor of usingthis.owner.register
directlythis.render
will begin being asynchronous to allow for further iteration in the underlying rendering engines ability to speed up render times (by yielding back to the browser and not blocking the main thread)this.pauseTest
andthis.resumeTest
are being addedthis.element
is being introduced as a public API for DOM assertions in a jQuery-less environment- QUnit nested modules are required
These changes generally do not affect our ability to write a codemod to aide in the migration.
The migration can likely be largely automated (following the
excellent codemod that
Tobias Bieniek wrote for a similar ember-mocha
the transition), but it is still useful to review concrete scenarios
of tests before and after this RFC is implemented.
// **** before ****
import { moduleForComponent, test } from 'ember-qunit';
import hbs from 'htmlbars-inline-precompile';
moduleForComponent('x-foo', {
integration: true
});
test('renders', function(assert) {
assert.expect(1);
this.render(hbs`{{pretty-color name="red"}}`);
assert.equal(this.$('.color-name').text(), 'red');
});
// **** after ****
import { module, test } from 'qunit';
import { setupRenderingTest } from 'ember-qunit';
import hbs from 'htmlbars-inline-precompile';
module('x-foo', function(hooks) {
setupRenderingTest(hooks);
test('renders', async function(assert) {
assert.expect(1);
await this.render(hbs`{{pretty-color name="red"}}`);
assert.equal(this.$('.color-name').text(), 'red');
});
});
// **** before ****
import { moduleForComponent, test } from 'ember-qunit';
moduleForComponent('x-foo', {
unit: true
});
test('computes properly', function(assert) {
assert.expect(1);
let subject = this.subject({
name: 'something'
});
let result = subject.get('someCP');
assert.equal(result, 'expected value');
});
// **** after ****
import { module, test } from 'qunit';
import { setupTest } from 'ember-qunit';
module('x-foo', function(hooks) {
setupTest(hooks);
test('computed properly', function(assert) {
assert.expect(1);
let Factory = this.owner.factoryFor('component:x-foo');
let subject = Factory.create({
name: 'something'
});
let result = subject.get('someCP');
assert.equal(result, 'expected value');
});
});
// **** before ****
import { moduleFor, test } from 'ember-qunit';
moduleFor('service:flash', 'Unit | Service | Flash', {
unit: true
});
test('should allow messages to be queued', function (assert) {
assert.expect(4);
let subject = this.subject();
subject.show('some message here');
let messages = subject.messages;
assert.deepEqual(messages, [
'some message here'
]);
});
// **** after ****
import { module, test } from 'qunit';
import { setupTest } from 'ember-qunit';
module('Unit | Service | Flash', function(hooks) {
setupTest(hooks);
test('should allow messages to be queued', function (assert) {
assert.expect(4);
let subject = this.owner.lookup('service:flash');
subject.show('some message here');
let messages = subject.messages;
assert.deepEqual(messages, [
'some message here'
]);
});
});
The blueprints in all official projects (and any provided by popular addons)
will need to be updated to detect ember-qunit
version and emit the correct
output.
This includes:
- ember-source
- ember-data
- ember-cli-legacy-blueprints
- others?
This exact process was done for ember-mocha
's migration, making this a well
trodden path.
The guides includes a section for testing, this section needs to be reviewed and revamped to match the proposal here.
Once this RFC is implemented, the older APIs will be deprecated and retained
for a full LTS cycle (assuming speedy landing, this would mean the older APIs
would be deprecated around Ember 2.20). After that timeframe, the older APIs
will be removed from ember-qunit
and ember-test-helpers
and they will
release with SemVer major version bumps.
Note that while the older moduleFor
and moduleForComponent
APIs will be
deprecated, they will still be possible to use since the host application can
pin to a version of ember-qunit
/ ember-test-helpers
that support its own
usage. This is a large benefit of migrating these testing features away from
Ember
's internals, and into the addon space.
This RFC is a small stepping stone towards the future where all types of tests share a similar API. The API proposed here is much easier to extend to provide the functionality that is required for emberjs/rfcs#119.
This change requires updates to the API documentation of ember-qunit
and the
main Ember guides' testing section. The changes are largely intended to reduce
confusion, making it easier to teach and understand testing in Ember.
As mentioned in emberjs/rfcs#229, test related churn is quite painful and annoying. In order to maintain the general goodwill of folks, we must ensure that we avoid needless churn.
This RFC should be implemented in conjunction with emberjs/rfcs#229 so that we can avoid multiple back to back changes in the blueprints.
Until very recently, the QUnit nested module API was only able to allow a single
callback for each of the hooks per-nesting level. This means that the proposal in
this RFC (which requires the hooks to be setup by ember-qunit
) would disallow
user-land beforeEach
/afterEach
hooks to be setup.
The work around is "simple" (if somewhat annoying), which is to "just nest another level". The good news is that Trent Willis fixed the underlying problem in qunitjs/qunit#1188, which should be released as 2.3.4 well before this RFC is merged.
The simplest alternative is to do nothing. This would loose all of the positive benefits mentioned in this RFC, but should still be considered a possibility...
A few folks (e.g. @ebryn and @stefanpenner)
have approached me with concerns around the hooks
argument I have mentioned/used here. The concerns
are generally an initial reaction to the QUnit nested modules API in general and not directly related
to this RFC (other than it highlighting a new feature that they haven't used before).
The main concerns are:
- Teaching folks what
hooks
means is a bit more difficult because it does not represent the "test environment", but rather just a way to invoke the callbacks forbefore
/beforeEach
/after
/afterEach
. - Passing only
hooks
to the helper functions proposed in the RFC means that if we ever need to thread more information through, we either have to usehooks
as a transport or change our API to add more arguments. - It seems somewhat impossible to communicate across multiple helpers (again without using
hooks
as a state/transport mechanism).
I've kicked off a conversation over with the QUnit folks in qunitjs/qunit#1200. If that PR were merged this proposal would be modified to the following syntax:
// current proposal
module('x-foo', function(hooks) {
setupRenderingTest(hooks);
// ....snip....
});
// after qunitjs/qunit#1200
module('x-foo', function(hooks) {
setupRenderingTest(this);
// ....snip....
});
Another possible solution is to rename the argument (here and in the blueprints) to module
.
This is more in line with what the QUnit folks view it as: the "module context" that
is being created for that specific QUnit.module
invocation.