Improving Code Coverage in src/components/UserPortal/OrganizationCard/OrganizationCard.tsx #3307
Conversation
|
Important Review skippedMore than 25% of the files skipped due to max files limit. The review is being skipped to prevent a low-quality review. 193 files out of 275 files are above the max files limit of 75. Please upgrade to Pro plan to get higher limits. You can disable this status message by setting the WalkthroughThe pull request introduces additional test cases for the Changes
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Our Pull Request Approval ProcessThanks for contributing! Testing Your CodeRemember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:
Our policies make our code better. ReviewersDo not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
Reviewing Your CodeYour reviewer(s) will have the following roles:
CONTRIBUTING.mdRead our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:
Other
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop-postgres #3307 +/- ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage 7.95% 89.89% +81.93%
=====================================================
Files 312 331 +19
Lines 8105 8602 +497
Branches 1801 1898 +97
=====================================================
+ Hits 645 7733 +7088
+ Misses 7393 613 -6780
- Partials 67 256 +189
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
@MayankJha014 Please fix the failed tests. |
|
Please make a minor commit. The failing test should be fixed with that |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/components/UserPortal/OrganizationCard/OrganizationCard.test.tsx (3)
79-98: Consider aligning error messages with toast notificationsWhile the mock data structure is good, consider aligning the error messages with the toast notifications for better clarity:
- Mock error "User is already a member" maps to toast "AlreadyJoined"
- Mock error "Some unexpected error occurred" maps to toast "errorOccured"
This alignment would make the test cases more maintainable and easier to understand.
- error: new Error('User is already a member'), + error: new Error('AlreadyJoined'),- error: new Error('Some unexpected error occurred'), + error: new Error('errorOccured'),
349-405: Enhance test cases for better coverage and clarityThe new test cases are good additions, but could be improved:
- Make test descriptions more specific:
- test('Displays error when user is already a member', async () => { + test('Should show "AlreadyJoined" toast when attempting to join an organization user is already member of', async () => {- test('Displays generic error when a different error occurs', async () => { + test('Should show "errorOccured" toast when membership request fails with unexpected error', async () => {
- Remove redundant comments and add more meaningful ones:
- // Wait for component to render - await waitFor(() => - expect(screen.getByTestId('joinBtn')).toBeInTheDocument(), - ); - - // Simulate clicking the join button - fireEvent.click(screen.getByTestId('joinBtn')); - - // Wait for the error handling + // Arrange: Wait for join button to be available + await waitFor(() => expect(screen.getByTestId('joinBtn')).toBeInTheDocument()); + + // Act: Attempt to join organization + fireEvent.click(screen.getByTestId('joinBtn')); + + // Assert: Verify error handling await waitFor(() => { expect(toast.error).toHaveBeenCalledWith('AlreadyJoined'); + expect(toast.success).not.toHaveBeenCalled(); });
- Consider adding error message content verification:
expect(toast.error).toHaveBeenCalledWith(expect.stringContaining('Already'));
349-405: Consider organizing related tests into describe blocksThe error handling tests are related and could be grouped together for better organization:
describe('error handling', () => { test('Should show "AlreadyJoined" toast when...', async () => { // ... first test }); test('Should show "errorOccured" toast when...', async () => { // ... second test }); });This would make the test suite more maintainable and easier to navigate.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/components/UserPortal/OrganizationCard/OrganizationCard.test.tsx(6 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/components/UserPortal/OrganizationCard/OrganizationCard.test.tsx (1)
2-8: LGTM! Good choice usingwaitForThe addition of
waitForfrom '@testing-library/react' is a good improvement over using custom wait functions for async operations.
|
Please fix the conflicting file |
…ation/talawa-admin into orgcard_cov_inc
Increasing code coverage by removing comments /* istanbul ignore */ and also improving test case
Issue: #3070
Summary by CodeRabbit