Rey-Wang / react-testing-strategies

Pragmatic Front-End Testing Strategies

What the demo contains

this demo generated by the create-react-app + Typescript, contains a complete component:

What the demo for

We should get a answer for those questions:

1. Which part of our code should write unit testing
   • Using this repo, I would try several strategies, we could compare the differences via PR, Then we could see the coverage and other indicators
2. How could make test case writing more effective
   • Using this repo, we could choose one way, which should be simply writing and quick test
3. How do we choose testing tools
4. How do we understand the boundary between unit testing with E2E testing

Testing Strategies

A complete component contains:

1. Component Render ✅

   Only care about the first render

   • useEffect
   • Call hooks
   • Call selectors
   • Dispatch action
   • Handle event
   • render

2. Hooks

   using the @testing-library/react-hooks + react-test-render we could simply mock a component (without any child render) and execute the hooks, then test it as a pure function

   • Call selector ✅
   • Dispatch action ✅
   • Converter ✅

3. Selectors ✅

   We can simply mock the state, and call selectors as a pure function

4. Slice ✅

   We use the createSlice instead of template code of actions, reducers, we don't need to care about what we done in reducers and actions , we should focus on the thunk action functions

   1. Actions
      • Call services
   2. Reducers
      • Manage State logic

5. Services

   • Call API ✅ we can simply mock the request function, focus on the logic inside service
   • Some response calculation ✅ keep its an pure function

6. Utils

   • pure tool function ✅

Reference

When choosing testing tools, it is worth considering a few tradeoffs:

• Iteration speed vs Realistic environment: Some tools offer a very quick feedback loop between making a change and seeing the result, but don’t model the browser behavior precisely. Other tools might use a real browser environment, but reduce the iteration speed and are flakier on a continuous integration server.
• How much to mock: With components, the distinction between a “unit” and “integration” test can be blurry. If you’re testing a form, should its test also test the buttons inside of it? Or should a button component have its own test suite? Should refactoring a button ever break the form test?

Different answers may work for different teams and products.

https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/72627206 React单元测试策略及落地

key point:

1. 为什么要写单元测试

   人员会流动，应用会变大。人员一定会流动，需求一定会增加，直至再也没有一个人能够了解应用的所有功能，那时对应用做出修改的成本将变得很高。因此，意图依赖人、依赖手工的方式来应对响应力的挑战首先是低效的，从时间维度上来讲也是不可能的。因此，为了服务于“高响应力”这个目标，随时重构整理代码是必须的，这就需要我们有一套自动化的测试套件，它能帮我们提供快速反馈，做质量的守卫者。唯解决了人工、质量的这一环，开发效率才能稳步提升，团队和企业的高响应力才可能达到。

2. TDD

   单元测试应该由开发者，在开发软件的同时编写对应的单元测试。它应该是内建的，而不是后补的：也即在编写实现的同时完成单元测试，而不是写完代码再一次性补足。测试先行，这正是TDD的做法。使用TDD开发方法是得到可靠单元测试的唯一途径。

   长久以来，大家都认为单测是单测，TDD是TDD，说单测必须要有，但是否使用TDD（测试先行）应该尊重开发者的习惯爱好。但事实是，且不说测试很难补，补出来的测试也几乎不可能完整覆盖我们对重构和质量的要求。TDD和单元测试是全有或全无：不做TDD，难以得到好的单元测试；TDD是获得可靠的单元测试的的唯一途径。除此之外别无捷径，想抛开TDD而获得一个好的单元测试套件是迷思，难以成功。

3. 单元测试的价值原则

   • 只关注输入输出，不关注内部实现
   • 只测一条分支
   • 表达力极强
     • 看到测试时，你就知道它测的业务点是啥
     • 测试挂掉时，能清楚地知道失败的业务场景、期望数据与实际输出的差异
   • 不包含逻辑
     • 测试需要都是简单的声明：准备数据、调用函数、断言，让人一眼就明白这个测试在测什么
   • 运行速度快

   

https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/04/testing-strategies-for-react-and-redux/ Testing Strategies for React and Redux

key point:

• We dispatch real Redux actions to test application state changes.
• We test each component only once using shallow rendering.
• We resist full DOM rendering (with mount()) as much as possible.
• We test component integration by checking properties.
• Static typing helps validate our component properties.
• We simulate user events and make assertions about what action was dispatched.

https://www.valentinog.com/blog/testing-react/