Fix Copyable tooltip spec #2519
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
stephl3
commented
Oct 25, 2024
Comment on lines
116
to
117
| await waitFor(() => expect(getByText('Copied!')).toBeVisible()); | ||
| const tooltip = getByText('Copied!'); | ||
|
|
||
| // Tooltip should remain visible for a while | ||
| await waitFor(() => expect(tooltip).toBeVisible()); | ||
|
|
||
| await new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, 1000)); | ||
| expect(getByText('Copied!')).toBeVisible(); | ||
|
|
||
| // Tooltip should eventually disappear | ||
| await waitForElementToBeRemoved(() => queryByText('Copied!')); | ||
| await waitFor(() => expect(tooltip).not.toBeVisible()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This does slightly alter how we're testing, but I think the most important thing is still tested which is that the tooltip appears and disappears after some time. Open to feedback if this warrants a different approach
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Curious, do we know what was causing the flakiness? I would feel like switching
await new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, 1000));to
await waitFor(() => expect(getByText('Copied!')).toBeVisible());alone would have fixed the test since it was failing on line 120 and not on line 123. I'm wondering why 123 needs a change at all?
Also curious, why are we waiting for 1 second on line 119/121?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What currently happens is:
- user clicks and tooltip opens
useEffectcloses tooltip after 1500ms
The first line change fixes the flake:
await waitFor(() => expect(getByText('Copied!')).toBeVisible());Consequently, the second line was breaking because it was timing out while waiting for the element to be removed which is why I left in line 119/121
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I replaced the duration with a constant and used it in the test. Open to feedback on writing the spec better
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if it would be better to just lengthen the waitFor timeout. If it's just an early timeout, I believe that should solve it without the need for pausing execution entirely.
await waitFor(
() => expect(tooltip).not.toBeVisible(),
{ timeout: TOOLTIP_VISIBLE_DURATION } // or more if necessary?
);
|
Size Change: 0 B Total Size: 1.39 MB ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
stephl3
force-pushed
the
steph/po-fix-test
branch
from
6e05093
to
979fa9f
Compare
stephl3
force-pushed
the
steph/po-fix-test
branch
from
979fa9f
to
4f3ac42
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
✍️ Proposed changes
Fixes flaky test
