fdim / jasmine-unit-test-generator Goto Github PK

fakeElementRef = jasmine.createSpyObj<ElementRef<HTMLElement>>('ElementRef<HTMLElement>', []);

Code above fails at runtime, as jasmine requires at least one method. In this case it might be better to fallback to

fakeElementRef = { } as ElementRef<HTMLElement>;

since it is a common use case, it should be supported by default

Generated code should have a subject for router events (if used) and params/paramMap/queryParams/queryParamMap

EDIT: handler should also provide RouterTestingModule to component, to handle a case when routerLink is used in template

I was testing out this library(thanks for your hard work by the way), and I believe I ran across a small bug. I ran the generate script on a component that uses ActivatedRoute.
constructor(private route: ActivatedRoute, private messageService: MessageService) { }
this.route.params.pipe(take(1)).subscribe((params) => {// do stuff})

The tooling generated the following code, which fails to compile due to a typing error:

fakeRoute = jasmine.createSpyObj<ActivatedRoute>('ActivatedRoute', ['']);

I believe it should be:

fakeRoute = jasmine.createSpyObj<ActivatedRoute>('ActivatedRoute', []);

I believe this happens whenever you inject a service but don't call any methods on that service.

getting this error

  fakeRouter = jasmine.createSpyObj<Router>("Router", []);
  fakeAuthenticationService = jasmine.createSpyObj<AuthenticationService>("AuthenticationService", []);

error log

Chrome Headless 107.0.5304.107 (Windows 10) AppComponent should create FAILED
        Failed: createSpyObj requires a non-empty array or object of method names to create spies for
            at failCallback (node_modules/zone.js/dist/zone-testing.js:1369:46)
            at apply (node_modules/zone.js/dist/zone-testing.js:1427:25)
    

start using waitForAsync instead async in component test

Hey Domas,

This project is quite interesting. How hard is it to make it work flawlessly?

I mean, the project currently creates a great boilerplate but the ultimate goal could be to create all positive and negative tests.

I'd like to understand what are the pitfalls you have already seen :)

When this decorator is used, values should be provided this way in the component test

TBD