Fix #1807: Added test for DashboardCard component #2058
Conversation
Summary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughAdds a new comprehensive unit test suite for the DashboardCard React component (frontend/tests/unit/components/DashboardCard.test.tsx), mocking dependent components and covering rendering, conditional logic, props, DOM structure/classNames, edge cases, and re-render stability. No production code or public API changes. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes Assessment against linked issues
Suggested reviewers
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
✨ 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. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR/Issue comments)Type Other keywords and placeholders
Status, 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: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/DashboardCard.test.tsx (3)
103-108: Enhance icon rendering test to verify actual icon differences.While the test correctly verifies that SVG elements are rendered with different icons, it doesn't actually validate that the icons are different from each other.
Consider enhancing the test to verify the actual icon differences:
it('renders different icons based on prop', () => { - const { rerender } = render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} icon={faUser} />) - expect(screen.getByTestId('secondary-content').querySelector('svg')).toBeInTheDocument() - rerender(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} icon={faChartBar} />) - expect(screen.getByTestId('secondary-content').querySelector('svg')).toBeInTheDocument() + const { rerender } = render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} icon={faUser} />) + const svg1 = screen.getByTestId('secondary-content').querySelector('svg') + expect(svg1).toBeInTheDocument() + + rerender(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} icon={faChartBar} />) + const svg2 = screen.getByTestId('secondary-content').querySelector('svg') + expect(svg2).toBeInTheDocument() + + // Verify that different icons produce different SVG content + expect(svg1?.outerHTML).not.toBe(svg2?.outerHTML) })
143-150: Optimize edge case testing for stats values.The current approach rerenders the entire component for each stats value test. This can be streamlined for better performance and readability.
Apply this diff to use parameterized testing:
it('renders stats as string and handles edge cases', () => { - render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'0'} />) - expect(screen.getByText('0')).toBeInTheDocument() - render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'-999'} />) - expect(screen.getByText('-999')).toBeInTheDocument() - render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'9999999999'} />) - expect(screen.getByText('9999999999')).toBeInTheDocument() + const testCases = ['0', '-999', '9999999999'] + const { rerender } = render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats="initial" />) + + testCases.forEach(statsValue => { + rerender(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={statsValue} />) + expect(screen.getByText(statsValue)).toBeInTheDocument() + }) })
167-167: Fix TypeScript assertion for better type safety.The type assertion for null stats is unnecessarily complex and could be simplified.
Apply this diff for cleaner TypeScript handling:
- render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={null as unknown as string} />) + render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={null} />)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/DashboardCard.test.tsx(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
📓 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.
🔇 Additional comments (7)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/DashboardCard.test.tsx (7)
1-6: LGTM! Clean imports and proper setup.The imports are well-organized with external dependencies first, followed by React Testing Library utilities, React, Jest DOM matchers, and the component under test.
7-43: Excellent mock implementations for isolated testing.The mocks for
AnchorTitleandSecondaryCardproperly isolate theDashboardCardcomponent while maintaining the expected interface. The use ofdata-testidattributes and prop spreading ensures the mocks behave similarly to the real components for testing purposes.
45-55: Well-structured test setup with proper cleanup.The base props object provides a clean foundation for tests, and the
beforeEachcleanup ensures test isolation.
57-70: Comprehensive essential rendering tests.These tests effectively verify the core rendering functionality with minimal props and text content display, covering the fundamental requirements from the issue checklist.
188-192: LGTM! Proper handling of unknown props with TypeScript.The use of
@ts-expect-erroris appropriate here to intentionally test the component's resilience to unexpected props while maintaining type safety during normal usage.
195-222: Excellent performance and optimization testing.These tests effectively verify that the component handles multiple re-renders and rapid prop changes gracefully, which is important for dashboard components that may receive frequent updates.
1-224: Outstanding comprehensive test coverage that fully addresses issue requirements.This test suite excellently fulfills all the requirements from issue #1807:
- ✅ Renders successfully with minimal required props
- ✅ Conditional rendering logic
- ✅ Prop-based behavior
- ✅ Event handling (through component integration)
- ✅ State changes/internal logic
- ✅ Default values and fallbacks
- ✅ Text and content rendering
- ✅ Edge cases and invalid inputs
- ✅ Accessibility roles and labels (could be enhanced)
- ✅ DOM structure/classNames/styles
The test organization is logical with clear describe blocks, and the use of mocks properly isolates the component under test. The performance testing section shows thoughtful consideration of real-world usage patterns.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/DashboardCard.test.tsx (4)
24-43: SecondaryCard mock has unused parameter.The
_iconparameter is declared but never used in the mock implementation. Consider removing it or using it appropriately.jest.mock('components/SecondaryCard', () => ({ __esModule: true, default: ({ - title, - children, - className, - ...props - }: { - _icon: unknown - title: React.ReactNode - children: React.ReactNode - className?: string - [key: string]: unknown - }) => ( + title, + children, + className, + ...props + }: { + title: React.ReactNode + children: React.ReactNode + className?: string + [key: string]: unknown + }) => ( <div data-testid="secondary-card" className={className} {...props}> <h3>{title}</h3> <div data-testid="secondary-content">{children}</div> </div> ), }))
46-51: Consider simplifying baseProps initialization.Setting optional props to
undefinedis redundant since they're already optional. This makes the test setup cleaner.const baseProps = { title: 'Test Card', icon: faUser, - className: undefined, - stats: undefined, }
143-150: Inefficient test pattern with multiple renders.Multiple render calls within a single test can be inefficient and harder to debug. Consider splitting into separate test cases for better clarity and performance.
-it('renders stats as string and handles edge cases', () => { - render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'0'} />) - expect(screen.getByText('0')).toBeInTheDocument() - render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'-999'} />) - expect(screen.getByText('-999')).toBeInTheDocument() - render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'9999999999'} />) - expect(screen.getByText('9999999999')).toBeInTheDocument() -}) +it('renders stats as zero', () => { + render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'0'} />) + expect(screen.getByText('0')).toBeInTheDocument() +}) + +it('renders negative stats', () => { + render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'-999'} />) + expect(screen.getByText('-999')).toBeInTheDocument() +}) + +it('renders very large stats', () => { + render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={'9999999999'} />) + expect(screen.getByText('9999999999')).toBeInTheDocument() +})
163-169: Unnecessary unmount and type casting.The unmount call is redundant since each test gets a fresh render, and the type casting with
as unknown as stringis unnecessarily complex.it('does not render <p> if stats is undefined or null', () => { - const { unmount } = render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={undefined} />) + render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={undefined} />) expect(screen.getByTestId('secondary-content').querySelector('p')).not.toBeInTheDocument() - unmount() - render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={null as unknown as string} />) - expect(screen.getByTestId('secondary-content').querySelector('p')).not.toBeInTheDocument() }) + +it('does not render <p> if stats is null', () => { + // @ts-expect-error Testing null case + render(<DashboardCard {...baseProps} stats={null} />) + expect(screen.getByTestId('secondary-content').querySelector('p')).not.toBeInTheDocument() +})
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/DashboardCard.test.tsx(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
📓 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.
🔇 Additional comments (4)
frontend/__tests__/unit/components/DashboardCard.test.tsx (4)
1-5: Imports look good.All necessary dependencies are imported correctly for testing a React component with FontAwesome icons.
7-22: Well-structured AnchorTitle mock.The mock properly handles props spreading and provides the necessary test attributes for reliable querying.
195-222: Comprehensive performance testing.Excellent coverage of re-rendering scenarios and prop changes. This validates component stability under dynamic conditions.
57-223: Excellent test coverage overall.The test suite comprehensively covers:
- Essential rendering scenarios
- Conditional logic
- Prop-based behavior variations
- DOM structure validation
- Edge cases and error conditions
- Component integration
- Performance considerations
This aligns well with the PR objectives and provides thorough validation of the DashboardCard component functionality.
|
* Added test for DashboardCard component * Added more test --------- Co-authored-by: Kate Golovanova <[email protected]>
2 participants
Resolves #1807
Description
Added Unit Tests for DashboardCard Component
Added comprehensive test suite with 22 test cases covering:
Checklist
make check-testlocally; all checks and tests passed.