Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve Code Coverage in src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.tsx #3471

Conversation

Priyanshuthapliyal2005
Copy link

@Priyanshuthapliyal2005 Priyanshuthapliyal2005 commented Jan 28, 2025

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Improve Code Coverage in src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.tsx

Issue Number:

Fixes #3033

Snapshots/Videos:

Screenshot 2025-01-28 004822

If relevant, did you update the documentation?
No

Summary

  • All sections of the file are covered by tests.
  • Improved code coverage for OrgPost.tsx .

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No

CodeRabbit AI Review

  • I have reviewed and addressed all critical issues flagged by CodeRabbit AI
  • I have implemented or provided justification for each non-critical suggestion
  • I have documented my reasoning in the PR comments where CodeRabbit AI suggestions were not implemented

Test Coverage

  • I have written tests for all new changes/features
  • I have verified that test coverage meets or exceeds 95%
  • I have run the test suite locally and all tests pass

Other information

Have you read the contributing guide?

Summary by CodeRabbit

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests

    • Expanded test coverage for OrgPost component
    • Added comprehensive tests for:
      • Media uploads
      • Search functionality
      • Post creation
      • Pagination controls
      • Error handling
    • Improved test suite robustness and scenario coverage
    • Renamed test cases for clarity and consistency
  • Improvements

    • Added data-testid attributes to pagination buttons for better testability
    • Enhanced asynchronous handling in tests for improved reliability
  • Documentation

    • Updated documentation for the default() function to reflect changes in its definition location.

Signed-off-by: Priyanshu Thapliyal <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 28, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request involves minor updates to the OrgPost module, primarily focusing on test suite improvements and documentation. The changes include updating the line number in the documentation for the default() function, modifying test method signatures from test() to it(), and adding data-testid attributes to pagination buttons. These modifications aim to enhance test coverage and improve the testability of the component.

Changes

File Change Summary
docs/docs/auto-docs/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost/functions/default.md Updated function line number from 70 to 71
src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.spec.tsx Replaced all test() method signatures with it()
Added new mocks for pagination and post creation
Enhanced test coverage with more comprehensive test cases
src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.tsx Reorganized import statements
Added data-testid attributes to "Previous" and "Next" buttons

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Improve Code Coverage [#3033]
Review file for uncovered sections
Create/update test cases
Remove coverage bypass statements No explicit removal of coverage bypass statements observed

Possibly related issues

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • palisadoes

Poem

🐰 A Rabbit's Test Coverage Tale 🧪

In lines of code, we hop and test,
Each function checked with rabbit zest,
From test() to it() we leap,
Our coverage now runs deep and steep!

Codecov smiles, our tests shine bright! 🌟


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

  1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
    1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
  2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
    1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
    2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
    3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
  3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

  1. comments in this PR or
  2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

  1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
  2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
  3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
  4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

  1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
  2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

  1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
  2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (7)
src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.spec.tsx (7)

181-293: Consider moving mock data to a separate file.

The mock data definitions are well-structured but could be moved to a separate file (e.g., __mocks__/orgPost.ts) to improve maintainability and reduce file size.

Also, ensure the successMock includes all required variables:

 variables: {
   title: 'Test Post',
   text: 'Test Content',
   file: '',
   pinned: false,
+  organizationId: '123',
 },

307-333: Add test cases for file validation.

Consider adding test cases for:

  • File size validation
  • Invalid file types
  • Multiple file uploads

Example:

it('should reject files larger than the size limit', async () => {
  const largeFile = new File(['x'.repeat(5242880)], 'large.png', { type: 'image/png' });
  userEvent.upload(screen.getByTestId('addMediaField'), largeFile);
  expect(await screen.findByText(/File size exceeds limit/i)).toBeInTheDocument();
});

335-357: Enhance search functionality test coverage.

Consider adding test cases for:

  • Minimum search length validation
  • Special characters handling
  • Search results sorting

Also, consider using faker library to generate test data for more robust testing:

import { faker } from '@faker-js/faker';

it('should handle special characters in search', async () => {
  const searchTerm = faker.string.special();
  userEvent.type(screen.getByPlaceholderText(/Search By/i), searchTerm);
  expect(screen.getByPlaceholderText(/Search By/i)).toHaveValue(searchTerm);
});

358-389: Add validation test cases for post creation.

Consider adding test cases for:

  • Maximum title and content length validation
  • HTML content sanitization
  • Duplicate post detection

Example:

it('should validate maximum content length', async () => {
  const longText = 'a'.repeat(1001);
  fireEvent.change(screen.getByTestId('modalinfo'), {
    target: { value: longText },
  });
  expect(screen.getByText(/Content exceeds maximum length/i)).toBeInTheDocument();
});

391-419: Add accessibility test cases for modal.

Consider adding test cases for:

  • Keyboard interactions (Esc key to close)
  • Click outside modal to close
  • Focus trap within modal

Example:

it('should close modal on Escape key press', async () => {
  userEvent.click(screen.getByTestId('createPostModalBtn'));
  expect(screen.getByTestId('modalOrganizationHeader')).toBeInTheDocument();
  
  fireEvent.keyDown(document.body, { key: 'Escape' });
  expect(screen.queryByTestId('modalOrganizationHeader')).not.toBeInTheDocument();
});

884-1076: Enhance pagination test coverage.

Consider adding test cases for:

  • Page size changes
  • Total pages calculation
  • Edge cases (e.g., last page with fewer items)

Example:

it('should handle last page with fewer items', async () => {
  const lastPageMock = {
    ...paginationMock,
    result: {
      data: {
        organizations: [{
          posts: {
            edges: mockPostEdges.slice(0, 2),
            pageInfo: {
              hasNextPage: false,
              hasPreviousPage: true
            },
            totalCount: 10
          }
        }]
      }
    }
  };
  // Test implementation
});

1078-1166: Add more error handling test cases.

Consider adding test cases for:

  • Network errors
  • Server errors (500, 400, etc.)
  • Rate limiting errors

Example:

it('should handle network errors', async () => {
  const networkErrorMock = {
    request: {
      query: CREATE_POST_MUTATION,
      variables: {
        title: 'Test',
        text: 'Content'
      }
    },
    error: new Error('Network error: Failed to fetch')
  };
  // Test implementation
});
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a7f3771 and 449aea4.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • docs/docs/auto-docs/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost/functions/default.md (1 hunks)
  • src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.spec.tsx (14 hunks)
  • src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.tsx (3 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
  • src/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost.tsx
  • docs/docs/auto-docs/screens/OrgPost/OrgPost/functions/default.md
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
  • GitHub Check: Test Application

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 28, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.80%. Comparing base (73cf8cd) to head (449aea4).
Report is 6 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files
@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #3471       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage              1.90%   88.80%   +86.90%     
=====================================================
  Files                   316      338       +22     
  Lines                  8249     8620      +371     
  Branches               1880     1918       +38     
=====================================================
+ Hits                    157     7655     +7498     
+ Misses                 8083      636     -7447     
- Partials                  9      329      +320     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@varshith257 varshith257 merged commit 2d47e89 into PalisadoesFoundation:develop-postgres Jan 28, 2025
19 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants