Test placing a call in a group call #2593
Conversation
Refactors a bit of the call testing stuff Fixes element-hq/element-call#521
spec/unit/webrtc/groupCall.spec.ts
Outdated
| expect(mockSendState.mock.calls[0][0]).toEqual(FAKE_ROOM_ID); | ||
| expect(mockSendState.mock.calls[0][1]).toEqual(EventType.GroupCallPrefix); | ||
| expect(mockSendState.mock.calls[0][2]["m.type"]).toEqual(GroupCallType.Video); | ||
| expect(mockSendState.mock.calls[0][2]["m.intent"]).toEqual(GroupCallIntent.Prompt); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason not to use toHaveBeenCalledWith()?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I managed to replace one with that using expect.objectContaining(), although it seemed to confuse the other ones.
spec/unit/webrtc/groupCall.spec.ts
Outdated
| } | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it("unmutes audio", async () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am struggling to see what exactly this is doing/why it has this name
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's fairly basic and just asserts that calling the mute API correctly disables the stream. I've updated the name to maybe make it clearer.
spec/unit/webrtc/groupCall.spec.ts
Outdated
| } | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it("unmutes video", async () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am struggling to see what exactly this is doing/why it has this name
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have likewise updated the name, (but yes, it's still perhaps a bit of silly test, but easy to write).
|
Oh, so you did - github had hidden it for me :/ |
Refactors a bit of the call testing stuff
Fixes element-hq/element-call#521
Checklist
This change is marked as an internal change (Task), so will not be included in the changelog.