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

Add Unit Tests for OrgPostCard #2265

Merged

Conversation

Abhinav232004
Copy link

@Abhinav232004 Abhinav232004 commented Sep 13, 2024

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
This PR introduces unit tests for the OrgPostCard component .

Issue Number:
Fixes #1868

Did you add tests for your changes?
Not relevant here

Snapshots/Videos:
Screenshot 2024-09-13 223702

If relevant, did you update the documentation?
Not relevant here

Summary
1.Added comprehensive unit tests for OrgPostCard.tsx to achieve 100% code coverage.
2.Ensured that all referenced components, widgets, and modals were tested.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No

Other information

Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Enhanced testing suite for the OrgPostCard component with new test cases for image click functionality and post update scenarios.
    • Improved coverage for edge cases, ensuring correct behavior when required fields are left empty and verifying component state resets after interactions.
    • Added checks for rendering behavior based on postInfo string length, ensuring dynamic display of the "Read more" button.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 13, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request enhance the testing suite for the OrgPostCard component by adding new test cases and refining existing ones. The modifications include tests for opening posts on image clicks, handling post updates with validation for required fields, and ensuring proper rendering based on the content length. These updates aim to improve test coverage and clarity.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/components/OrgPostCard/OrgPostCard.test.tsx Added new test cases for image click functionality, post updating scenarios, and state resets. Modified existing tests to streamline usage.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Code Coverage: Create tests for src/components/OrgPostCard/OrgPostCard.tsx (#1868)
Ensure 100% coverage for all methods, classes, and functions in the file (#1868)
Cover all widgets, components, and modals referenced in the file with unit tests (#1868) Unclear if all components are covered.

Poem

In the garden of code, we hop and play,
Testing the posts in a lively way.
With clicks and updates, we dance with glee,
Ensuring our features are bug-free!
A rabbit's delight in every test run,
Hopping through changes, oh what fun! 🐇✨

Tip

OpenAI O1 model for chat
  • We have deployed OpenAI's latest O1 model for chat.
  • OpenAI claims that this model has superior reasoning capabilities than their GPT-4o model.
  • Please share any feedback with us in the discussions post.

Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 315641f and 59cdacd.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/components/OrgPostCard/OrgPostCard.test.tsx (22 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (4)
src/components/OrgPostCard/OrgPostCard.test.tsx (4)

138-151: LGTM!

The test correctly verifies that clicking on the post image opens the post and displays the relevant elements such as the card text, title, and image.


281-358: LGTM!

The test thoroughly verifies the failure scenario when updating a post with missing required fields. It ensures that the update is not performed when the title or text fields are empty, and the modal remains open with the entered values preserved.


655-679: LGTM!

The test correctly verifies that the post title state is cleared and the file input value is reset when attempting to update a post with an empty title field. It checks that the modal remains open with the empty title value and the update button is still present.


680-704: LGTM!

The test correctly verifies that the post info state is cleared and the file input value is reset when attempting to update a post with an empty info field. It checks that the modal remains open with the empty info value and the update button is still present.


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>.
    • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @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 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

We have these basic policies to make the approval process smoother for our volunteer team.

Testing Your Code

Please make sure your code passes all tests. Our test code coverage system will fail if these conditions occur:

  1. The overall code coverage drops below the target threshold of the repository
  2. Any file in the pull request has code coverage levels below the repository threshold
  3. Merge conflicts

The process helps maintain the overall reliability of the code base and is a prerequisite for getting your PR approved. Assigned reviewers regularly review the PR queue and tend to focus on PRs that are passing.

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

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Congratulations on making your first PR! 🎊 If you haven't already, check out our Contributing Guidelines and PR Reporting Guidelines to ensure that you are following our guidelines for contributing and creating PR.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 13, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.54%. Comparing base (315641f) to head (59cdacd).
Report is 2 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #2265      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    97.45%   97.54%   +0.08%     
===========================================
  Files          241      241              
  Lines         6882     6882              
  Branches      2000     2013      +13     
===========================================
+ Hits          6707     6713       +6     
+ Misses         161      157       -4     
+ Partials        14       12       -2     

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

Copy link
Member

@pranshugupta54 pranshugupta54 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

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.

3 participants