馃И Testing: Fill in test coverage for augmentOptionsWithExcludes #699
Labels
area: testing
Improving how the repository's tests are run and/or code is tested
good first issue
Good for newcomers, please hop on!
status: accepting prs
Please, send a pull request to resolve this!
type: cleanup
Tech debt or other code/repository cleanups
Comments
JoshuaKGoldberg
added
good first issue
|
hey, I would love to contribute, can you please help me. I"m a beginner here...Thanks |
|
馃憢 hey @shobhit9957, great! My advice would be to:
Cheers! I'm planning on writing a more helpful blog post soon. Hopefully that list is useful until then. |
|
hey 馃槉thanks @JoshuaKGoldberg will follow the steps you've provided and update you with the feedbacks!, |
2 tasks
3 tasks
JoshuaKGoldberg
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 14, 2024
## PR Checklist - [x] Addresses an existing open issue: fixes #1276 - [x] That issue was marked as [`status: accepting prs`](https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg/create-typescript-app/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22status%3A+accepting+prs%22) - [x] Steps in [CONTRIBUTING.md](https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg/create-typescript-app/blob/main/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) were taken ## Overview Attaches `base` the options returned during augmentation, so they can get printed out later. I noticed that the `exclusionKeys` stuff was exported from the `augmentOptionsWithExcludes.ts` file but never used in its tests. So I extracted it to a new `exclusionKeys.ts`. Adds some unit tests, but doesn't do all of #699. There's still coverage missing. Co-authored-by: @niklas-wortmann
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Bug Report Checklist
mainbranch of the repository.Overview
#695 added a bunch of code changes. I didn't fully unit test them - not because I was too impatient to write tests (me?! never!!), but because I wanted to leave some good first issues as followups. Definitely that.
augmentOptionsWithExcludesis missing unit test coverage forseveral dozen linesone or two lines.augmentOptionsWithExcludes.test.tsonly tests the case of fully automated usage. It doesn't test what happens when the user is prompted for anything. Let's add tests toaugmentOptionsWithExcludes.test.tsthat exercise the calls toprompt!Additional Info
You'll likely need to use Vitest mocking - specifically,
vi.mock. Search forvi.mock("@clack/prompts"in code to see how other unit tests accomplish this.We don't need complete 100% unit test coverage of the file. If the tests are giving you grief, feel free to send an incomplete Draft PR with comments asking for help. 鉂わ笍
Note that the code might have been refactored since this issue was filed. Names might be slightly off. The general spirit of this issue should still be valid though.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: