Support testing without an application template wrapper. #305

cibernox · 2018-01-21T04:17:36Z

Is this the best way to check if a feature flag is enabled?

rwjblue · 2018-01-21T22:41:40Z

addon-test-support/@ember/test-helpers/setup-application-context.js

@@ -19,7 +19,12 @@ export function visit() {
      return owner.visit(...arguments);
    })
    .then(() => {
-      context.element = document.querySelector('#ember-testing > .ember-view');
+      // eslint-disable-next-line
+      if (EmberENV.FEATURES['ember-glimmer-remove-application-template-wrapper']) {


This might work for now, but isn't a good long term solution (once it moves to beta this will be falsey).

I think what we need to do is render an empty template, detect if there are any ember-views and then memoize (so we only have to do the extra rendering one time for the entire suite)/

@cibernox - Now that this has settled, we can use EmberENV._APPLICATION_TEMPLATE_WRAPPER. A true value means we need #ember-testing > .ember-view and a false value means we need #ember-testing.

I'll update it.

rwjblue · 2018-02-07T15:15:45Z

addon-test-support/@ember/test-helpers/setup-application-context.js

@@ -19,7 +19,12 @@ export function visit() {
      return owner.visit(...arguments);
    })
    .then(() => {
-      context.element = document.querySelector('#ember-testing > .ember-view');
+      // eslint-disable-next-line
+      if (EmberENV.FEATURES['ember-glimmer-remove-application-template-wrapper']) {


@cibernox - Now that this has settled, we can use EmberENV._APPLICATION_TEMPLATE_WRAPPER. A true value means we need #ember-testing > .ember-view and a false value means we need #ember-testing.

rwjblue · 2018-02-07T15:16:15Z

addon-test-support/@ember/test-helpers/setup-rendering-context.js

@@ -196,7 +196,12 @@ export default function setupRenderingContext(context) {
      // In older Ember versions (2.4) the element itself is not stable,
      // and therefore we cannot update the `this.element` until after the
      // rendering is completed
-      context.element = getRootElement().querySelector('.ember-view');
+      // eslint-disable-next-line
+      if (EmberENV.FEATURES['ember-glimmer-remove-application-template-wrapper']) {


See above, should be able to use EmberENV._APPLICATION_TEMPLATE_WRAPPER here.

rwjblue · 2018-02-07T15:35:23Z

tests/dummy/config/environment.js

@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ module.exports = function(environment) {
      FEATURES: {
        // Here you can enable experimental features on an ember canary build
        // e.g. 'with-controller': true
+        'ember-glimmer-remove-application-template-wrapper': true,


Lets remove this.

In order to test (until ember-cli/ember-try#181 lands in a release) we will need to:

add an ember-try scenario for ember-canary-without-application-wrapper

add that scenario to .travis.yml

update tests/dummy/config/environment.js to do:

EmberENV: { // ...snip other normal stuff... _APPLICATION_TEMPLATE_WRAPPER: process.env.EMBER_TRY_CURRENT_SCENARIO === 'ember-canary-without-application-wrapper' ? false : true }

cibernox · 2018-02-07T16:32:21Z

@rwjblue I think this is ready.
However, how some the feature flag has become an underscored prop in EmberENV. Is this FF still enabled the same way?

rwjblue · 2018-02-07T16:44:36Z

However, how some the feature flag has become an underscored prop in EmberENV. Is this FF still enabled the same way?

It is expected to be enabled via the @ember/optional-features addon which takes care of setting up the private environment flag. In the long run, all of this will be moved to be build time (so we don't ship both sets of implementation in Ember) but for now it is runtime (based on EmberENV._APPLICATION_TEMPLATE_WRAPPER).

I'll update this addon in a followup PR to leverage @ember/optional-features and ember-try's integration...

cibernox · 2018-02-07T17:43:27Z

@rwjblue Do the failures make sense to you?

rwjblue · 2018-02-09T23:12:12Z

Yes, I am working on fixing the canary failure in emberjs/ember.js#16232.

Also, I pushed some commits which cleanup the testing harness a bit (to more of what we expect "normal" addons to do going forward).

…ate-wrapper enabled

rwjblue · 2018-02-10T11:44:19Z

ZOMG, finally green.

cibernox · 2018-02-10T11:50:04Z

Looks great.

Turbo87 · 2018-02-10T12:39:32Z

.travis.yml

@@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ jobs:
    - env: EMBER_TRY_SCENARIO=ember-beta
    - env: EMBER_TRY_SCENARIO=ember-canary
    - env: EMBER_TRY_SCENARIO=ember-default-with-jquery
+    - env: EMBER_TRY_SCENARIO=ember-canary-without-application-wrapper


can we drop the canary from the scenario name? I assume this functionality will eventually exist outside of canary and that currently it uses canary is only an implementation detail, right?

yep, will do

Turbo87 · 2018-02-10T12:42:54Z

addon-test-support/@ember/test-helpers/setup-application-context.js

@@ -19,7 +19,12 @@ export function visit() {
      return owner.visit(...arguments);
    })
    .then(() => {
-      context.element = document.querySelector('#ember-testing > .ember-view');
+      // eslint-disable-next-line


I would prefer /* global EmberENV */ because eslint-disable-next-line disables all linting rules

agree, will update

Turbo87 · 2018-02-10T12:43:03Z

addon-test-support/@ember/test-helpers/setup-rendering-context.js

@@ -196,7 +196,12 @@ export default function setupRenderingContext(context) {
      // In older Ember versions (2.4) the element itself is not stable,
      // and therefore we cannot update the `this.element` until after the
      // rendering is completed
-      context.element = getRootElement().querySelector('.ember-view');
+      // eslint-disable-next-line


Turbo87 · 2018-02-10T12:44:27Z

package.json

    "ember-source-channel-url": "^1.0.1",
-    "ember-try": "^0.2.23",
+    "ember-try": "^1.0.0-beta.1",


offtopic: mmhhh.... I have thoughts about promoting this to 1.0.0...

haha, we can always make a 2.0 😸 If there are specific things wrong with ember-try, please make issues so we can discuss the details.

IMHO, there is basically no reason to not have the ability to signal "new API's are added" (normal minor version bump) from "bug fixes" (normal patch release).

ember-cli/ember-try#155

Turbo87 · 2018-02-10T12:45:10Z

tests/integration/setup-rendering-context-test.js

      this.set('rootElement', rootElement);

      await render(hbs`{{#-in-element rootElement}}{{click-me-button}}{{/-in-element}}`);

-      // this will need to be modified / removed once RFC280 lands
-      assert.equal(this.element.textContent, '', 'no content is contained _within_ this.element');


why is this removed?

Because this.element (when the optional flag is enabled) will have content. I can swap things around a bit and guard the assertions, but I think I'd rather have two tests instead. One for "with a wrapper div" and one "without a wrapper"...

what content will be in there and why wasn't it in there before? I'm not sure I understand the assertion 🤔

The test (as it exists on master) is actually testing a few different things:

this.element within the test context is not the #ember-testing div

when rendering only content that is "wormholed" (via in-element in this case), the actual this.element is still empty (because the wormholed content is somewhere else)

that we can interact (e.g. click) with elements that are within the #ember-testing div (even though they are above the this.element).

As you can tell some of these assertions are no longer needed with the changes from emberjs/rfcs#280. Specifically:

this.element within the test context is not the #ember-testing div

without the wrapper DIV, the this.element actually is #ember-testing

when rendering only content that is "wormholed", the actual this.element is still empty

due to the above, this is not true any longer. this.element will have content (the wormholed content)

These two changes are the assertions that were being removed (when you commented). I have changed things around a bit so that we have two different tests (one with an application template wrapper and one without it).

that we can interact (e.g. click) with elements that are within the #ember-testing div (even though they are above the this.element).

given that we use document.querySelector('#ember-testing > .ember-view') how is click() able to interact with elements above this.element? last time I've tried it didn't work with wormholed content (yet) 🤔

This behavior was changed in #295. click and friends are always operating on the root element (#ember-testing generally speaking) which is not this.element. The specific test that we are commenting on ATM is actually introduce in that PR specifically to address the wormholed content scenario...

tldr; we don't use document.querySelector('#ember-testing > .ember-view') for interaction helpers as of that PR

I see. Turns out we are still on v0.7.10 of @ember/test-helpers (though newest ember-cli-qunit) which is the reason why it didn't work when I tried it.

Turbo87 · 2018-02-10T12:45:28Z

tests/integration/setup-rendering-context-test.js

-        rootElement,
-        this.element,
-        'precond - confirm that the rootElement is different from this.element'
-      );


should we keep this assertion and run it conditionally instead?

ya, I'll make it two tests

Ultimately, this will become part of released Ember versions so no reason to keep `canary` in the name.

rwjblue · 2018-02-10T14:45:22Z

Created emberjs/ember-optional-features#10 to track swapping out the manual EmberENV checks in favor of something more reliable provided by @ember/optional-features.

rwjblue reviewed Jan 21, 2018

View reviewed changes

rwjblue requested changes Feb 7, 2018

View reviewed changes

cibernox force-pushed the support-root-less-apps branch from 65355f1 to 13859d3 Compare February 7, 2018 16:31

rwjblue approved these changes Feb 7, 2018

View reviewed changes

cibernox and others added 5 commits February 9, 2018 21:36

Support apps with Feature Flag ember-glimmer-remove-application-templ…

b33e608

…ate-wrapper enabled

Apply last feedback

008a507

Use official mechanism for feature testing.

cf11a35

Remove extra assertions which require wrapper application template.

6108cc3

Correct yarn version (use 3.0.0-beta series).

b2708fa

rwjblue force-pushed the support-root-less-apps branch from 3016ace to b2708fa Compare February 10, 2018 02:37

rwjblue added 2 commits February 9, 2018 21:44

Fix moduleForComponent with missing template wrapper.

7d0b188

Use explicit check for checking for application template wrapper.

71d0ec0

rwjblue requested a review from Turbo87 February 10, 2018 11:45

rwjblue approved these changes Feb 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

rwjblue changed the title ~~[WIP]Support apps with Feature Flag ember-glimmer-remove-application-template-wrapper enabled~~ Support apps with Feature Flag ember-glimmer-remove-application-template-wrapper enabled Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 reviewed Feb 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

Turbo87 added the enhancement label Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue added 4 commits February 10, 2018 08:19

Cleanup linting enable/disable for EmberENV.

cce1782

Simplify naming of without application wrapper scenario.

7af8ea2

Ultimately, this will become part of released Ember versions so no reason to keep `canary` in the name.

Test clicking "wormholed" content with and without wrapper div.

df741fb

Ensure tests exist for where this.element goes.

a16b9d3

rwjblue changed the title ~~Support apps with Feature Flag ember-glimmer-remove-application-template-wrapper enabled~~ Support testing without an application template wrapper. Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2018

Update @ember/test-helpers to v0.7.17 emberjs/ember-qunit#313

Merged

Turbo87 approved these changes Feb 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

rwjblue merged commit 39e8194 into emberjs:master Feb 10, 2018

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Support testing without an application template wrapper. #305

Support testing without an application template wrapper. #305

cibernox commented Jan 21, 2018

rwjblue Jan 21, 2018

rwjblue Feb 7, 2018

cibernox Feb 7, 2018

rwjblue Feb 7, 2018

rwjblue Feb 7, 2018

rwjblue Feb 7, 2018

cibernox commented Feb 7, 2018

rwjblue commented Feb 7, 2018

cibernox commented Feb 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

rwjblue commented Feb 9, 2018

rwjblue commented Feb 10, 2018

cibernox commented Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

Turbo87 Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018

rwjblue commented Feb 10, 2018

Support testing without an application template wrapper. #305

Support testing without an application template wrapper. #305

Conversation

cibernox commented Jan 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cibernox commented Feb 7, 2018

rwjblue commented Feb 7, 2018

cibernox commented Feb 7, 2018 • edited Loading

rwjblue commented Feb 9, 2018

rwjblue commented Feb 10, 2018

cibernox commented Feb 10, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rwjblue commented Feb 10, 2018

cibernox commented Feb 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

rwjblue Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading