Fix #1810: Added tests for <Footer> component #1945
Conversation
Summary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughA new unit test suite for the Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes Assessment against linked issues
Assessment against linked issues: Out-of-scope changesNo out-of-scope changes found. Suggested reviewers
Note ⚡️ Unit Test Generation is now available in beta!Learn more here, or try it out under "Finishing Touches" below. ✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. 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
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (2)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: Rajgupta36
PR: OWASP/Nest#1717
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/pages/createProgram.test.tsx:70-86
Timestamp: 2025-07-12T17:36:57.255Z
Learning: When testing React page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be tested at the form component level, not the page level. Page-level tests should focus on authentication, role checking, submission handling, and navigation logic.
📚 Learning: when testing react page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be teste...
Learnt from: Rajgupta36
PR: OWASP/Nest#1717
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/pages/createProgram.test.tsx:70-86
Timestamp: 2025-07-12T17:36:57.255Z
Learning: When testing React page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be tested at the form component level, not the page level. Page-level tests should focus on authentication, role checking, submission handling, and navigation logic.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
🔇 Additional comments (7)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx (7)
1-32: Excellent TypeScript interface definitions and imports.The imports are comprehensive and the mock prop interfaces are well-structured with proper typing for all necessary properties including ARIA attributes. This follows React Testing Library best practices.
34-100: Well-structured mocks with comprehensive coverage.The mock implementations correctly simulate all external dependencies. The Next.js Link mock properly renders as an anchor element, and the FontAwesome mock uses data-testid for reliable testing.
147-218: Comprehensive rendering tests with good coverage.The tests effectively verify all aspects of footer rendering including semantic HTML structure, link attributes, social media icons, and dynamic copyright year. The use of proper screen queries and assertions follows React Testing Library best practices.
250-262: Verify the expected behavior for multiple section toggles.The test expects
buttons[0]to havearia-expanded="false"after clickingbuttons[1], but there's no indication in the test setup that sections should close when others open. This could be testing incorrect behavior.Please verify if the Footer component implements accordion-style behavior (only one section open at a time) or independent toggle behavior. If it's independent toggles, this assertion should be removed:
fireEvent.click(buttons[1]) - expect(buttons[0]).toHaveAttribute('aria-expanded', 'false') expect(buttons[1]).toHaveAttribute('aria-expanded', 'true')
265-329: Excellent accessibility and conditional rendering coverage.The tests comprehensively verify accessibility requirements including ARIA attributes, semantic HTML structure, and proper labeling. The conditional rendering tests for production environment and span elements are well-implemented.
331-390: Good coverage of styling and edge cases.The tests verify CSS classes and handle edge cases appropriately. Note that testing specific Tailwind classes can be brittle if styling changes, but it's valuable for ensuring visual consistency.
392-409: Well-structured integration tests completing comprehensive coverage.The integration tests effectively verify that all mocked dependencies work correctly together. The overall test suite successfully addresses all objectives from issue #1810 with 22 well-organized test cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx (1)
105-106: Remove unnecessary variable assignments.The mock data is already available through the imported
footerSectionsandfooterIconsfrom line 8. These assignments create unnecessary indirection without addressing the duplication issue mentioned in the previous review.Either use the imports directly throughout the tests:
- const mockFooterSections = footerSections - const mockFooterIcons = footerIconsOr follow the previous suggestion to properly import from the mocked module:
- const mockFooterSections = footerSections - const mockFooterIcons = footerIcons + const { footerSections: mockFooterSections, footerIcons: mockFooterIcons } = jest.requireMocked('utils/constants')
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx (1)
260-266: Remove duplicate span element test.The span element rendering is tested in both "Conditional Rendering" (lines 260-266) and "Edge Cases" (lines 363-369) sections with nearly identical assertions.
Remove one of the duplicate tests, preferably keeping it in the "Conditional Rendering" section since it's testing conditional rendering behavior:
- test('handles sections with span elements', () => { - renderFooter() - - const spanElement = screen.getByText('Plain Text') - expect(spanElement.tagName).toBe('SPAN') - expect(spanElement.closest('a')).toBeNull() - })Also applies to: 363-369
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (7)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: Rajgupta36
PR: OWASP/Nest#1717
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/pages/createProgram.test.tsx:70-86
Timestamp: 2025-07-12T17:36:57.255Z
Learning: When testing React page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be tested at the form component level, not the page level. Page-level tests should focus on authentication, role checking, submission handling, and navigation logic.
📚 Learning: when testing react page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be teste...
Learnt from: Rajgupta36
PR: OWASP/Nest#1717
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/pages/createProgram.test.tsx:70-86
Timestamp: 2025-07-12T17:36:57.255Z
Learning: When testing React page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be tested at the form component level, not the page level. Page-level tests should focus on authentication, role checking, submission handling, and navigation logic.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp nest project's barchart component (frontend/src/components/barchart.tsx), the days and ...
Learnt from: ahmedxgouda
PR: OWASP/Nest#1703
File: frontend/src/components/BarChart.tsx:33-46
Timestamp: 2025-07-03T03:08:03.290Z
Learning: In the OWASP Nest project's BarChart component (frontend/src/components/BarChart.tsx), the days and requirements arrays are guaranteed to always have the same length in their use cases, so input validation for array length matching is not needed.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp/nest project, the maintainer adithya-naik prefers not to create separate components for...
Learnt from: adithya-naik
PR: OWASP/Nest#1894
File: frontend/src/components/TopContributorsList.tsx:74-74
Timestamp: 2025-07-28T14:51:14.736Z
Learning: In the OWASP/Nest project, the maintainer adithya-naik prefers not to create separate components for code that's only used in two specific cases, following the YAGNI principle to avoid over-engineering when the duplication is limited and manageable.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp/nest project, interfaces or types are not created for component props that are used onl...
Learnt from: kasya
PR: OWASP/Nest#1680
File: frontend/src/components/SponsorCard.tsx:3-3
Timestamp: 2025-06-30T00:55:03.133Z
Learning: In the OWASP/Nest project, interfaces or types are not created for component props that are used only once. Inline prop type definitions are preferred for single-use cases.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp nest project, exact mathematical accuracy in mock data is not required. mock data value...
Learnt from: ahmedxgouda
PR: OWASP/Nest#1714
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/data/mockProjectsDashboardOverviewData.ts:12-14
Timestamp: 2025-07-08T16:25:39.325Z
Learning: In the OWASP Nest project, exact mathematical accuracy in mock data is not required. Mock data values can be simplified or rounded for testing purposes, as the focus is on testing functionality rather than precise calculations.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp/nest project, union types for component props are not necessary when they would require...
Learnt from: ahmedxgouda
PR: OWASP/Nest#1714
File: frontend/src/components/ProjectTypeDashboardCard.tsx:8-12
Timestamp: 2025-07-08T17:07:50.988Z
Learning: In the OWASP/Nest project, union types for component props are not necessary when they would require creating separate type definitions. The project prefers inline prop type definitions even for props with specific string values, maintaining consistency with the single-use component prop pattern.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
🔇 Additional comments (4)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx (4)
121-198: Well-structured rendering tests with comprehensive coverage!The rendering tests effectively cover all key elements including sections, links, icons, copyright with dynamic year, and version information. Good separation of concerns between regular links and span elements.
269-309: Excellent accessibility test coverage!The accessibility tests thoroughly verify ARIA attributes, semantic HTML structure, proper heading levels, and accessible labels. This demonstrates a strong commitment to making the component accessible.
1-389: Comprehensive test suite that successfully addresses all PR objectives!This test suite effectively covers all the requirements from issue #1810, including rendering, interactivity, accessibility, styling, edge cases, and integration testing. The tests are well-organized and follow React Testing Library best practices.
230-242: Remove incorrect concern: Footer enforces single‐section expansion
TheFootercomponent’stoggleSectioncallback uses a singleopenSectionstate (in frontend/src/components/Footer.tsx) and intentionally collapses any previously open section when a new one is clicked. The multiple‐toggles test correctly reflects this accordion behavior. No changes are needed.Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx (2)
103-119: Good test suite organization and cleanup.The test setup includes proper mock clearing and restoration, though there's some redundancy in the cleanup methods.
The
beforeEachandafterEachboth calljest.clearAllMocks(). Consider simplifying:beforeEach(() => { jest.clearAllMocks() }) afterEach(() => { - jest.clearAllMocks() jest.restoreAllMocks() })
311-353: Comprehensive CSS class and styling verification.Good coverage of styling classes and responsive behavior, though the last test in this section seems incomplete.
The test on lines 344-352 appears incomplete - it only checks that the button has
aria-expanded="true"after clicking, but doesn't verify the actual CSS classes mentioned in the test name:test('applies correct section content classes for collapsed/expanded states', () => { renderFooter() const button = screen.getAllByRole('button')[0] + const sectionId = button.getAttribute('aria-controls') + const section = document.getElementById(sectionId!) fireEvent.click(button) expect(button).toHaveAttribute('aria-expanded', 'true') + // Add assertions for the actual CSS classes on the section content + expect(section).toHaveClass('expected-expanded-classes') })
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (6)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: Rajgupta36
PR: OWASP/Nest#1717
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/pages/createProgram.test.tsx:70-86
Timestamp: 2025-07-12T17:36:57.255Z
Learning: When testing React page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be tested at the form component level, not the page level. Page-level tests should focus on authentication, role checking, submission handling, and navigation logic.
📚 Learning: when testing react page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be teste...
Learnt from: Rajgupta36
PR: OWASP/Nest#1717
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/pages/createProgram.test.tsx:70-86
Timestamp: 2025-07-12T17:36:57.255Z
Learning: When testing React page components that use mocked form components, validation logic should be tested at the form component level, not the page level. Page-level tests should focus on authentication, role checking, submission handling, and navigation logic.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp nest project's barchart component (frontend/src/components/barchart.tsx), the days and ...
Learnt from: ahmedxgouda
PR: OWASP/Nest#1703
File: frontend/src/components/BarChart.tsx:33-46
Timestamp: 2025-07-03T03:08:03.290Z
Learning: In the OWASP Nest project's BarChart component (frontend/src/components/BarChart.tsx), the days and requirements arrays are guaranteed to always have the same length in their use cases, so input validation for array length matching is not needed.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp/nest project, the maintainer adithya-naik prefers not to create separate components for...
Learnt from: adithya-naik
PR: OWASP/Nest#1894
File: frontend/src/components/TopContributorsList.tsx:74-74
Timestamp: 2025-07-28T14:51:14.736Z
Learning: In the OWASP/Nest project, the maintainer adithya-naik prefers not to create separate components for code that's only used in two specific cases, following the YAGNI principle to avoid over-engineering when the duplication is limited and manageable.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp/nest project, interfaces or types are not created for component props that are used onl...
Learnt from: kasya
PR: OWASP/Nest#1680
File: frontend/src/components/SponsorCard.tsx:3-3
Timestamp: 2025-06-30T00:55:03.133Z
Learning: In the OWASP/Nest project, interfaces or types are not created for component props that are used only once. Inline prop type definitions are preferred for single-use cases.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
📚 Learning: in the owasp nest project, exact mathematical accuracy in mock data is not required. mock data value...
Learnt from: ahmedxgouda
PR: OWASP/Nest#1714
File: frontend/__tests__/unit/data/mockProjectsDashboardOverviewData.ts:12-14
Timestamp: 2025-07-08T16:25:39.325Z
Learning: In the OWASP Nest project, exact mathematical accuracy in mock data is not required. Mock data values can be simplified or rounded for testing purposes, as the focus is on testing functionality rather than precise calculations.
Applied to files:
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx
🔇 Additional comments (11)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/Footer.test.tsx (11)
1-10: LGTM! Clean imports and proper documentation.The file header provides good context with a reference to existing test patterns, and the imports are well-organized with proper TypeScript support.
11-34: Well-defined TypeScript interfaces for mocks.The mock interfaces properly define the expected props for each mocked component, ensuring type safety throughout the tests.
35-64: Comprehensive and accurate mocks for external dependencies.The mocks properly simulate the behavior of Next.js Link, FontAwesome icons, and HeroUI Button while preserving essential functionality needed for testing.
66-101: Mock data setup looks comprehensive.The mock constants cover the expected structure for footer sections and icons, including edge cases like span elements and different link types.
121-198: Comprehensive rendering and content tests.The tests thoroughly verify that all elements render correctly, including dynamic content like the current year and version information. The logic for handling regular links vs span elements is well-tested.
200-243: Thorough interactive behavior testing.The tests properly verify toggle functionality, ARIA attributes, and independent section behavior. Good coverage of user interactions.
245-267: Good conditional rendering coverage.Tests verify environment-specific behavior and proper handling of span elements vs links.
269-309: Excellent accessibility testing.The tests cover essential accessibility aspects including ARIA attributes, semantic structure, and proper labeling. This aligns well with the PR objectives for accessibility compliance.
355-370: Good edge case coverage.The tests handle missing href attributes and span elements appropriately, covering important edge cases mentioned in the PR objectives.
372-389: Solid integration testing.The integration tests verify that the component works correctly with all mocked dependencies, ensuring proper component assembly.
104-106: Good resolution of duplicate mock data issue.The test suite now properly references the mocked constants instead of duplicating them, addressing the previous review feedback effectively.
kasya
left a comment
kasya
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are great tests! 👍🏼
Thanks!
2 participants
Resolves #1810
Description
Added Unit Tests for Footer Component
Added comprehensive test suite with 22 test cases covering:
Checklist
make check-testlocally; all checks and tests passed.