Take a look at-Driving HTML Templates

What else ought to we check?

We all know that the seems to be of a web page can solely be examined, in the end, by a
human taking a look at how it’s rendered in a browser. Nevertheless, there may be usually
logic in templates, and we would like to have the ability to check that logic.

One is perhaps tempted to check the rendered HTML with string equality,
however this method fails in follow, as a result of templates comprise numerous
particulars that make string equality assertions impractical. The assertions
develop into very verbose, and when studying the assertion, it turns into troublesome
to grasp what it’s that we’re attempting to show.

What we want
is a way to say that some elements of the rendered HTML
correspond to what we anticipate, and to ignore all the main points we do not
care about. A technique to do that is by operating queries with the CSS selector language:
it’s a highly effective language that enables us to pick the
components that we care about from the entire HTML doc. As soon as we’ve got
chosen these components, we (1) depend that the variety of aspect returned
is what we anticipate, and (2) that they comprise the textual content or different content material
that we anticipate.

The UI that we’re speculated to generate seems to be like this:

There are a number of particulars which can be rendered dynamically:

1. The variety of objects and their textual content content material change, clearly
2. The fashion of the todo-item adjustments when it is accomplished (e.g., the
   second)
3. The “2 objects left” textual content will change with the variety of non-completed
   objects
4. One of many three buttons “All”, “Energetic”, “Accomplished” will probably be
   highlighted, relying on the present url; for example if we resolve that the
   url that reveals solely the “Energetic” objects is /energetic, then when the present url
   is /energetic, the “Energetic” button ought to be surrounded by a skinny pink
   rectangle
5. The “Clear accomplished” button ought to solely be seen if any merchandise is
   accomplished

Every of this considerations might be examined with the assistance of CSS selectors.

It is a snippet from the TodoMVC template (barely simplified). I
haven’t but added the dynamic bits, so what we see right here is static
content material, offered for example:

index.tmpl

  <part class="todoapp">
    <ul class="todo-list">
      <!-- These are right here simply to indicate the construction of the listing objects -->
      <!-- Checklist objects ought to get the category `accomplished` when marked as accomplished -->
      <li class="accomplished">  ②
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox" checked>
          <label>Style JavaScript</label> ①
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
      <li>
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
          <label>Purchase a unicorn</label> ①
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
    </ul>
    <footer class="footer">
      <!-- This ought to be `0 objects left` by default -->
      <span class="todo-count"><sturdy>0</sturdy> merchandise left</span> ⓷
      <ul class="filters">
        <li>
          <a class="chosen" href="#/">All</a> ④
        </li>
        <li>
          <a href="#/energetic">Energetic</a>
        </li>
        <li>
          <a href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <!-- Hidden if no accomplished objects are left ↓ -->
      <button class="clear-completed">Clear accomplished</button> ⑤
    </footer>
  </part>  

source

By wanting on the static model of the template, we are able to deduce which
CSS selectors can be utilized to determine the related components for the 5 dynamic
options listed above:

We are able to use these selectors to focus our assessments on simply the issues we need to check.

Testing HTML content material

The primary check will search for all of the objects, and show that the information
arrange by the check is rendered accurately.

func Test_todoItemsAreShown(t *testing.T) {
  mannequin := todo.NewList()
  mannequin.Add("Foo")
  mannequin.Add("Bar")

  buf := renderTemplate(mannequin)

  // assert there are two <li> components contained in the <ul class="todo-list"> 
  // assert the primary <li> textual content is "Foo"
  // assert the second <li> textual content is "Bar"
}

We want a method to question the HTML doc with our CSS selector; an excellent
library for Go is goquery, that implements an API impressed by jQuery.
In Java, we preserve utilizing the identical library we used to check for sound HTML, specifically
jsoup. Our check turns into:

Go

  func Test_todoItemsAreShown(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
    mannequin.Add("Foo")
    mannequin.Add("Bar")
  
    buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin)
  
    // parse the HTML with goquery
    doc, err := goquery.NewDocumentFromReader(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
    if err != nil {
      // if parsing fails, we cease the check right here with t.FatalF
      t.Fatalf("Error rendering template %s", err)
    }
  
    // assert there are two <li> components contained in the <ul class="todo-list">
    choice := doc.Discover("ul.todo-list li")
    assert.Equal(t, 2, choice.Size())
  
    // assert the primary <li> textual content is "Foo"
    assert.Equal(t, "Foo", textual content(choice.Nodes[0]))
  
    // assert the second <li> textual content is "Bar"
    assert.Equal(t, "Bar", textual content(choice.Nodes[1]))
  }
  
  func textual content(node *html.Node) string {
    // Slightly mess as a consequence of the truth that goquery has
    // a .Textual content() methodology on Choice however not on html.Node
    sel := goquery.Choice{Nodes: []*html.Node{node}}
    return strings.TrimSpace(sel.Textual content())
  }

source

Java

  @Take a look at
  void todoItemsAreShown() throws IOException {
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
      mannequin.add("Foo");
      mannequin.add("Bar");
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin);
  
      // parse the HTML with jsoup
      Doc doc = Jsoup.parse(html, "");
  
      // assert there are two <li> components contained in the <ul class="todo-list">
      var choice = doc.choose("ul.todo-list li");
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(2);
  
      // assert the primary <li> textual content is "Foo"
      assertThat(choice.get(0).textual content()).isEqualTo("Foo");
  
      // assert the second <li> textual content is "Bar"
      assertThat(choice.get(1).textual content()).isEqualTo("Bar");
  }

source

If we nonetheless have not modified the template to populate the listing from the
mannequin, this check will fail, as a result of the static template
todo objects have totally different textual content:

Go

  --- FAIL: Test_todoItemsAreShown (0.00s)
      index_template_test.go:44: First listing merchandise: need Foo, bought Style JavaScript
      index_template_test.go:49: Second listing merchandise: need Bar, bought Purchase a unicorn

Java

  IndexTemplateTest > todoItemsAreShown() FAILED
      org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
      Anticipating:
       <"Style JavaScript">
      to be equal to:
       <"Foo">
      however was not.

We repair it by making the template use the mannequin information:

Go

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ vary .Gadgets }}
      <li>
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
          <label>{{ .Title }}</label>
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
    {{ finish }}
  </ul>

source

Java – jmustache

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ #allItems }}
    <li>
      <div class="view">
        <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
        <label>{{ title }}</label>
        <button class="destroy"></button>
      </div>
    </li>
    {{ /allItems }}
  </ul>

source

Take a look at each content material and soundness on the similar time

Our check works, however it’s a bit verbose, particularly the Go model. If we will have extra
assessments, they’ll develop into repetitive and troublesome to learn, so we make it extra concise by extracting a helper operate for parsing the html. We additionally take away the
feedback, because the code ought to be clear sufficient

Go

  func Test_todoItemsAreShown(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
    mannequin.Add("Foo")
    mannequin.Add("Bar")
  
    buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin)
  
    doc := parseHtml(t, buf)
    choice := doc.Discover("ul.todo-list li")
    assert.Equal(t, 2, choice.Size())
    assert.Equal(t, "Foo", textual content(choice.Nodes[0]))
    assert.Equal(t, "Bar", textual content(choice.Nodes[1]))
  }
  
  func parseHtml(t *testing.T, buf bytes.Buffer) *goquery.Doc {
    doc, err := goquery.NewDocumentFromReader(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
    if err != nil {
      // if parsing fails, we cease the check right here with t.FatalF
      t.Fatalf("Error rendering template %s", err)
    }
    return doc
  }

Java

  @Take a look at
  void todoItemsAreShown() throws IOException {
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
      mannequin.add("Foo");
      mannequin.add("Bar");
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin);
  
      var doc = parseHtml(html);
      var choice = doc.choose("ul.todo-list li");
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(2);
      assertThat(choice.get(0).textual content()).isEqualTo("Foo");
      assertThat(choice.get(1).textual content()).isEqualTo("Bar");
  }
  
  personal static Doc parseHtml(String html) {
      return Jsoup.parse(html, "");
  }

Significantly better! A minimum of in my view. Now that we extracted the parseHtml helper, it is
a good suggestion to examine for sound HTML within the helper:

Go

  func parseHtml(t *testing.T, buf bytes.Buffer) *goquery.Doc {
    assertWellFormedHtml(t, buf)
    doc, err := goquery.NewDocumentFromReader(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
    if err != nil {
      // if parsing fails, we cease the check right here with t.FatalF
      t.Fatalf("Error rendering template %s", err)
    }
    return doc
  }

source

Java

  personal static Doc parseHtml(String html) {
      var parser = Parser.htmlParser().setTrackErrors(10);
      var doc = Jsoup.parse(html, "", parser);
      assertThat(parser.getErrors()).isEmpty();
      return doc;
  }

source

And with this, we are able to do away with the primary check that we wrote, as we are actually testing for sound HTML on a regular basis.

The second check

Now we’re in an excellent place for testing extra rendering logic. The
second dynamic function in our listing is “Checklist objects ought to get the category
accomplished when marked as accomplished”. We are able to write a check for this:

Go

  func Test_completedItemsGetCompletedClass(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
    mannequin.Add("Foo")
    mannequin.AddCompleted("Bar")
  
    buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin)
  
    doc := parseHtml(t, buf)
    choice := doc.Discover("ul.todo-list li.accomplished")
    assert.Equal(t, 1, choice.Measurement())
    assert.Equal(t, "Bar", textual content(choice.Nodes[0]))
  }

source

Java

  @Take a look at
  void completedItemsGetCompletedClass() {
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
      mannequin.add("Foo");
      mannequin.addCompleted("Bar");
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin);
  
      Doc doc = Jsoup.parse(html, "");
      var choice = doc.choose("ul.todo-list li.accomplished");
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(1);
      assertThat(choice.textual content()).isEqualTo("Bar");
  }

source

And this check might be made inexperienced by including this little bit of logic to the
template:

Go

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ vary .Gadgets }}
      <li class="{{ if .IsCompleted }}accomplished{{ finish }}">
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
          <label>{{ .Title }}</label>
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
    {{ finish }}
  </ul>

source

Java – jmustache

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ #allItems }}
    <li class="{{ #isCompleted }}accomplished{{ /isCompleted }}">
      <div class="view">
        <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
        <label>{{ title }}</label>
        <button class="destroy"></button>
      </div>
    </li>
    {{ /allItems }}
  </ul>

source

So little by little, we are able to check and add the assorted dynamic options
that our template ought to have.

Make it straightforward so as to add new assessments

The primary of the 20 ideas from the superb talk by Russ Cox on Go
Testing is “Make it straightforward so as to add new check instances“. Certainly, in Go there
is a bent to make most assessments parameterized, for this very purpose.
Alternatively, whereas Java has
good support
for parameterized tests with JUnit 5, they are not used as a lot.

Since our present two assessments have the identical construction, we
may issue them right into a single parameterized check.

A check case for us will encompass:

• A reputation (in order that we are able to produce clear error messages when the check
  fails)
• A mannequin (in our case a todo.Checklist)
• A CSS selector
• An inventory of textual content matches that we anticipate finding once we run the CSS
  selector on the rendered HTML.

So that is the information construction for our check instances:

Go

  var testCases = []struct {
    title     string
    mannequin    *todo.Checklist
    selector string
    matches  []string
  }{
    {
      title: "all todo objects are proven",
      mannequin: todo.NewList().
        Add("Foo").
        Add("Bar"),
      selector: "ul.todo-list li",
      matches:  []string{"Foo", "Bar"},
    },
    {
      title: "accomplished objects get the 'accomplished' class",
      mannequin: todo.NewList().
        Add("Foo").
        AddCompleted("Bar"),
      selector: "ul.todo-list li.accomplished",
      matches:  []string{"Bar"},
    },
  }

source

Java

  file TestCase(String title,
                  TodoList mannequin,
                  String selector,
                  Checklist<String> matches) {
      @Override
      public String toString() {
          return title;
      }
  }
  
  public static TestCase[] indexTestCases() {
      return new TestCase[]{
              new TestCase(
                      "all todo objects are proven",
                      new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .add("Bar"),
                      "ul.todo-list li",
                      Checklist.of("Foo", "Bar")),
              new TestCase(
                      "accomplished objects get the 'accomplished' class",
                      new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .addCompleted("Bar"),
                      "ul.todo-list li.accomplished",
                      Checklist.of("Bar")),
      };
  }

source

And that is our parameterized check:

Go

  func Test_indexTemplate(t *testing.T) {
    for _, check := vary testCases {
      t.Run(check.title, func(t *testing.T) {
        buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", check.mannequin)
  
        assertWellFormedHtml(t, buf)
        doc := parseHtml(t, buf)
        choice := doc.Discover(check.selector)
        require.Equal(t, len(check.matches), len(choice.Nodes), "sudden # of matches")
        for i, node := vary choice.Nodes {
          assert.Equal(t, check.matches[i], textual content(node))
        }
      })
    }
  }

source

Java

  @ParameterizedTest
  @MethodSource("indexTestCases")
  void testIndexTemplate(TestCase check) {
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", check.mannequin);
  
      var doc = parseHtml(html);
      var choice = doc.choose(check.selector);
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(check.matches.measurement());
      for (int i = 0; i < check.matches.measurement(); i++) {
          assertThat(choice.get(i).textual content()).isEqualTo(check.matches.get(i));
      }
  }

source

We are able to now run our parameterized check and see it cross:

Go

  $ go check -v
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/all_todo_items_are_shown
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/completed_items_get_the_'accomplished'_class
  --- PASS: Test_indexTemplate (0.00s)
      --- PASS: Test_indexTemplate/all_todo_items_are_shown (0.00s)
      --- PASS: Test_indexTemplate/completed_items_get_the_'accomplished'_class (0.00s)
  PASS
  okay    tdd-html-templates  0.608s

Java

  $ ./gradlew check
  
  > Activity :check
  
  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [1] all todo objects are proven PASSED
  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [2] accomplished objects get the 'accomplished' class PASSED

Notice how, by giving a reputation to our check instances, we get very readable check output, each on the terminal and within the IDE:

Having rewritten our two outdated assessments in desk kind, it is now tremendous straightforward so as to add
one other. That is the check for the “x objects left” textual content:

Go

  {
    title: "objects left",
    mannequin: todo.NewList().
      Add("One").
      Add("Two").
      AddCompleted("Three"),
    selector: "span.todo-count",
    matches:  []string{"2 objects left"},
  },

source

Java

  new TestCase(
      "objects left",
      new TodoList()
              .add("One")
              .add("Two")
              .addCompleted("Three"),
      "span.todo-count",
      Checklist.of("2 objects left")),

source

And the corresponding change within the html template is:

Go

  <span class="todo-count"><sturdy>{{len .ActiveItems}}</sturdy> objects left</span>

source

Java – jmustache

  <span class="todo-count"><sturdy>{{activeItemsCount}}</sturdy> objects left</span>

source

The above change within the template requires a supporting methodology within the mannequin:

Go

  sort Merchandise struct {
    Title       string
    IsCompleted bool
  }
  
  sort Checklist struct {
    Gadgets []*Merchandise
  }
  
  func (l *Checklist) ActiveItems() []*Merchandise {
    var outcome []*Merchandise
    for _, merchandise := vary l.Gadgets {
      if !merchandise.IsCompleted {
        outcome = append(outcome, merchandise)
      }
    }
    return outcome
  }

source

Java

  public class TodoList {
      personal remaining Checklist<TodoItem> objects = new ArrayList<>();
      // ...
      public lengthy activeItemsCount() {
          return objects.stream().filter(TodoItem::isActive).depend();
      }
  }

source

We have invested a little bit effort in our testing infrastructure, in order that including new
check instances is less complicated. Within the subsequent part, we’ll see that the necessities
for the following check instances will push us to refine our check infrastructure additional.

Making the desk extra expressive, on the expense of the check code

We are going to now check the “All”, “Energetic” and “Accomplished” navigation hyperlinks at
the underside of the UI (see the picture above),
and these depend upon which url we’re visiting, which is
one thing that our template has no method to discover out.

At present, all we cross to our template is our mannequin, which is a todo-list.
It is not appropriate so as to add the at the moment visited url to the mannequin, as a result of that’s
consumer navigation state, not software state.

So we have to cross extra data to the template past the mannequin. A simple means
is to cross a map, which we assemble in our
renderTemplate operate:

Go

  func renderTemplate(mannequin *todo.Checklist, path string) bytes.Buffer {
    templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl"))
    var buf bytes.Buffer
    information := map[string]any{
      "mannequin": mannequin,
      "path":  path,
    }
    err := templ.Execute(&buf, information)
    if err != nil {
      panic(err)
    }
    return buf
  }

Java

  personal String renderTemplate(String templateName, TodoList mannequin, String path) {
      var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
              new InputStreamReader(
                      getClass().getResourceAsStream(templateName)));
      var information = Map.of(
              "mannequin", mannequin,
              "path", path
      );
      return template.execute(information);
  }

And correspondingly our check instances desk has another subject:

Go

  var testCases = []struct {
    title     string
    mannequin    *todo.Checklist
    path     string
    selector string
    matches  []string
  }{
    {
      title: "all todo objects are proven",
      mannequin: todo.NewList().
        Add("Foo").
        Add("Bar"),
      selector: "ul.todo-list li",
      matches:  []string{"Foo", "Bar"},
    },
  // ... the opposite instances
    {
      title:     "highlighted navigation hyperlink: All",
      path:     "/",
      selector: "ul.filters a.chosen",
      matches:  []string{"All"},
    },
    {
      title:     "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Energetic",
      path:     "/energetic",
      selector: "ul.filters a.chosen",
      matches:  []string{"Energetic"},
    },
    {
      title:     "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished",
      path:     "/accomplished",
      selector: "ul.filters a.chosen",
      matches:  []string{"Accomplished"},
    },
  }

Java

  file TestCase(String title,
                  TodoList mannequin,
                  String path,
                  String selector,
                  Checklist<String> matches) {
      @Override
      public String toString() {
          return title;
      }
  }
  
  public static TestCase[] indexTestCases() {
      return new TestCase[]{
              new TestCase(
                      "all todo objects are proven",
                      new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .add("Bar"),
                      "/",
                      "ul.todo-list li",
                      Checklist.of("Foo", "Bar")),
              // ... the earlier instances
              new TestCase(
                      "highlighted navigation hyperlink: All",
                      new TodoList(),
                      "/",
                      "ul.filters a.chosen",
                      Checklist.of("All")),
              new TestCase(
                      "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Energetic",
                      new TodoList(),
                      "/energetic",
                      "ul.filters a.chosen",
                      Checklist.of("Energetic")),
              new TestCase(
                      "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished",
                      new TodoList(),
                      "/accomplished",
                      "ul.filters a.chosen",
                      Checklist.of("Accomplished")),
      };
  }

We discover that for the three new instances, the mannequin is irrelevant;
whereas for the earlier instances, the trail is irrelevant. The Go syntax permits us
to initialize a struct with simply the fields we’re excited about, however Java doesn’t have
the same function, so we’re pushed to cross further data, and this makes the check instances
desk tougher to grasp.

A developer would possibly take a look at the primary check case and surprise if the anticipated conduct relies upon
on the trail being set to “/”, and is perhaps tempted so as to add extra instances with
a unique path. In the identical means, when studying the
highlighted navigation hyperlink check instances, the developer would possibly surprise if the
anticipated conduct relies on the mannequin being set to an empty todo listing. If that’s the case, one would possibly
be led so as to add irrelevant check instances for the highlighted hyperlink with non-empty todo-lists.

We need to optimize for the time of the builders, so it is worthwhile to keep away from including irrelevant
information to our check case. In Java we would cross null for the
irrelevant fields, however there’s a greater means: we are able to use
the builder pattern,
popularized by Joshua Bloch.
We are able to rapidly write one for the Java TestCase file this fashion:

Java

  file TestCase(String title,
                  TodoList mannequin,
                  String path,
                  String selector,
                  Checklist<String> matches) {
      @Override
      public String toString() {
          return title;
      }
  
      public static remaining class Builder {
          String title;
          TodoList mannequin;
          String path;
          String selector;
          Checklist<String> matches;
  
          public Builder title(String title) {
              this.title = title;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder mannequin(TodoList mannequin) {
              this.mannequin = mannequin;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder path(String path) {
              this.path = path;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder selector(String selector) {
              this.selector = selector;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder matches(String ... matches) {
              this.matches = Arrays.asList(matches);
              return this;
          }
  
          public TestCase construct() {
              return new TestCase(title, mannequin, path, selector, matches);
          }
      }
  }

Hand-coding builders is a little bit tedious, however doable, although there are
automated ways to write down them.
Now we are able to rewrite our Java check instances with the Builder, to
obtain better readability:

Java

  public static TestCase[] indexTestCases() {
      return new TestCase[]{
              new TestCase.Builder()
                      .title("all todo objects are proven")
                      .mannequin(new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .add("Bar"))
                      .selector("ul.todo-list li")
                      .matches("Foo", "Bar")
                      .construct(),
              // ... different instances
              new TestCase.Builder()
                      .title("highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished")
                      .path("/accomplished")
                      .selector("ul.filters a.chosen")
                      .matches("Accomplished")
                      .construct(),
      };
  }

So, the place are we with our assessments? At current, they fail for the improper purpose: null-pointer exceptions
because of the lacking mannequin and path values.
With a purpose to get our new check instances to fail for the precise purpose, specifically that the template does
not but have logic to focus on the right hyperlink, we should
present default values for mannequin and path. In Go, we are able to do that
within the check methodology:

Go

  func Test_indexTemplate(t *testing.T) {
    for _, check := vary testCases {
      t.Run(check.title, func(t *testing.T) {
        if check.mannequin == nil {
          check.mannequin = todo.NewList()
        }
        buf := renderTemplate(check.mannequin, check.path)
        // ... similar as earlier than 
      })
    }
  }

source

In Java, we are able to present default values within the builder:

Java

  public static remaining class Builder {
      String title;
      TodoList mannequin = new TodoList();
      String path = "/";
      String selector;
      Checklist<String> matches;
      // ...
  }

source

With these adjustments, we see that the final two check instances, those for the highlighted hyperlink Energetic
and Accomplished fail, for the anticipated purpose that the highlighted hyperlink doesn’t change:

Go

  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/highlighted_navigation_link:_Active
      index_template_test.go:82: 
            Error Hint:  .../tdd-templates/go/index_template_test.go:82
            Error:        Not equal: 
                          anticipated: "Energetic"
                          precise  : "All"
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/highlighted_navigation_link:_Completed
      index_template_test.go:82: 
            Error Hint:  .../tdd-templates/go/index_template_test.go:82
            Error:        Not equal: 
                          anticipated: "Accomplished"
                          precise  : "All"

Java

  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [5] highlighted navigation hyperlink: Energetic FAILED
      org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
      Anticipating:
       <"All">
      to be equal to:
       <"Energetic">
      however was not.
  
  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [6] highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished FAILED
      org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
      Anticipating:
       <"All">
      to be equal to:
       <"Accomplished">
      however was not.

To make the assessments cross, we make these adjustments to the template:

Go

  <ul class="filters">
    <li>
      <a class="{{ if eq .path "/" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/">All</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ if eq .path "/energetic" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/energetic">Energetic</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ if eq .path "/accomplished" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a>
    </li>
  </ul>

source

Java – jmustache

  <ul class="filters">
    <li>
      <a class="{{ #pathRoot }}chosen{{ /pathRoot }}" href="#/">All</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ #pathActive }}chosen{{ /pathActive }}" href="#/energetic">Energetic</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ #pathCompleted }}chosen{{ /pathCompleted }}" href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a>
    </li>
  </ul>

source

Because the Mustache template language doesn’t permit for equality testing, we should change the
information handed to the template in order that we execute the equality assessments earlier than rendering the template:

Java

  personal String renderTemplate(String templateName, TodoList mannequin, String path) {
      var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
              new InputStreamReader(
                      getClass().getResourceAsStream(templateName)));
      var information = Map.of(
              "mannequin", mannequin,
              "pathRoot", path.equals("/"),
              "pathActive", path.equals("/energetic"),
              "pathCompleted", path.equals("/accomplished")
      );
      return template.execute(information);
  }

source

And with these adjustments, all of our assessments now cross.

To recap this part, we made the check code a little bit bit extra sophisticated, in order that the check
instances are clearer: it is a excellent tradeoff!

Loading the web page within the Playwright browser

We begin with a check that may simply load the preliminary HTML. The check
is a little bit concerned, so I present the whole code right here, after which I’ll
remark it little by little.

Go

  func Test_toggleTodoItem(t *testing.T) {
    // render the preliminary HTML
    mannequin := todo.NewList().
      Add("One").
      Add("Two")
    initialHtml := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin, "/")
  
    // open the browser web page with Playwright
    web page := openPage()
    defer web page.Shut()
    logActivity(web page)
  
    // stub community calls
    err := web page.Route("**", func(route playwright.Route) {
      if route.Request().URL() == "http://localhost:4567/index.html" {
        // serve the preliminary HTML
        stubResponse(route, initialHtml.String(), "textual content/html")
      } else {
        // keep away from sudden requests
        panic("sudden request: " + route.Request().URL())
      }
    })
    if err != nil {
      t.Deadly(err)
    }
  
    // load preliminary HTML within the web page
    response, err := web page.Goto("http://localhost:4567/index.html")
    if err != nil {
      t.Deadly(err)
    }
    if response.Standing() != 200 {
      t.Fatalf("sudden standing: %d", response.Standing())
    }
  }

source

Java

  public class IndexBehaviourTest {
      static Playwright playwright;
      static Browser browser;
  
      @BeforeAll
      static void launchBrowser() {
          playwright = Playwright.create();
          browser = playwright.chromium().launch();
      }
  
      @AfterAll
      static void closeBrowser() {
          playwright.shut();
      }
  
      @Take a look at
      void toggleTodoItem() {
          // Render the preliminary html
          TodoList mannequin = new TodoList()
                  .add("One")
                  .add("Two");
          String initialHtml = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin, "/");
          
          strive (Web page web page = browser.newPage()) {
              logActivity(web page);
  
              // stub community calls
              web page.route("**", route -> {
                  if (route.request().url().equals("http://localhost:4567/index.html")) {
                      // serve the preliminary HTML
                      route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
                              .setContentType("textual content/html")
                              .setBody(initialHtml));
                  } else {
                      // we do not need sudden calls
                      fail(String.format("Sudden request: %s %s", route.request().methodology(), route.request().url()));
                  }
              });
          
              // load preliminary html
              web page.navigate("http://localhost:4567/index.html");
          }
      }
  }

source

At first of the check, we initialize the mannequin with two todo
objects “One” and “Two”, then we render the template as earlier than:

Go

  mannequin := todo.NewList().
    Add("One").
    Add("Two")
  initialHtml := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin, "/")

Java

  TodoList mannequin = new TodoList()
          .add("One")
          .add("Two");
  String initialHtml = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin, "/");

Then we open the Playwright “web page”, which is able to begin a headless
browser

Go

  web page := openPage()
  defer web page.Shut()
  logActivity(web page)

Java

  strive (Web page web page = browser.newPage()) {
      logActivity(web page);

The openPage operate in Go returns a Playwright
Web page object,

Go

  func openPage() playwright.Web page {
    pw, err := playwright.Run()
    if err != nil {
      log.Fatalf("couldn't begin playwright: %v", err)
    }
    browser, err := pw.Chromium.Launch()
    if err != nil {
      log.Fatalf("couldn't launch browser: %v", err)
    }
    web page, err := browser.NewPage()
    if err != nil {
      log.Fatalf("couldn't create web page: %v", err)
    }
    return web page
  }

and the logActivity operate offers suggestions on what
the web page is doing

Go

  func logActivity(web page playwright.Web page) {
    web page.OnRequest(func(request playwright.Request) {
      log.Printf(">> %s %sn", request.Methodology(), request.URL())
    })
    web page.OnResponse(func(response playwright.Response) {
      log.Printf("<< %d %sn", response.Standing(), response.URL())
    })
    web page.OnLoad(func(web page playwright.Web page) {
      log.Println("Loaded: " + web page.URL())
    })
    web page.OnConsole(func(message playwright.ConsoleMessage) {
      log.Println("!  " + message.Textual content())
    })
  }

Java

  personal void logActivity(Web page web page) {
      web page.onRequest(request -> System.out.printf(">> %s %spercentn", request.methodology(), request.url()));
      web page.onResponse(response -> System.out.printf("<< %s %spercentn", response.standing(), response.url()));
      web page.onLoad(page1 -> System.out.println("Loaded: " + page1.url()));
      web page.onConsoleMessage(consoleMessage -> System.out.println("!  " + consoleMessage.textual content()));
  }

Then we stub all community exercise that the web page would possibly attempt to do

Go

  err := web page.Route("**", func(route playwright.Route) {
    if route.Request().URL() == "http://localhost:4567/index.html" {
      // serve the preliminary HTML
      stubResponse(route, initialHtml.String(), "textual content/html")
    } else {
      // keep away from sudden requests
      panic("sudden request: " + route.Request().URL())
    }
  })

Java

  // stub community calls
  web page.route("**", route -> {
      if (route.request().url().equals("http://localhost:4567/index.html")) {
          // serve the preliminary HTML
          route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
                  .setContentType("textual content/html")
                  .setBody(initialHtml));
      } else {
          // we do not need sudden calls
          fail(String.format("Sudden request: %s %s", route.request().methodology(), route.request().url()));
      }
  });

and we ask the web page to load the preliminary HTML

Go

  response, err := web page.Goto("http://localhost:4567/index.html")

Java

  web page.navigate("http://localhost:4567/index.html");

With all this equipment in place, we run the check; it succeeds and
it logs the stubbed community exercise on normal output:

Go

  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  --- PASS: Test_toggleTodoItem (0.89s)

Java

  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() STANDARD_OUT
      >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
      Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  
  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() PASSED

So with this check we are actually in a position to load arbitrary HTML in a
headless browser. Within the subsequent sections we’ll see the right way to simulate consumer
interplay with components of the web page, and observe the web page’s
behaviour. However first we have to clear up an issue with the dearth of
identifiers in our area mannequin.

Figuring out todo objects

Now we need to click on on the “One” checkbox. The issue we’ve got is
that at current, we’ve got no method to determine particular person todo objects, so
we introduce an Id subject within the todo merchandise:

Go – up to date mannequin with Id

  sort Merchandise struct {
    Id          int
    Title       string
    IsCompleted bool
  }
  
  func (l *Checklist) AddWithId(id int, title string) *Checklist {
    merchandise := Merchandise{
      Id:    id,
      Title: title,
    }
    l.Gadgets = append(l.Gadgets, &merchandise)
    return l
  }
  
  // Add creates a brand new todo.Merchandise with a random Id
  func (l *Checklist) Add(title string) *Checklist {
    merchandise := Merchandise{
      Id:    generateRandomId(),
      Title: title,
    }
    l.Gadgets = append(l.Gadgets, &merchandise)
    return l
  }
  
  func generateRandomId() int {
    return abs(rand.Int())
  }

Java – up to date mannequin with Id

  public class TodoList {
      personal remaining Checklist<TodoItem> objects = new ArrayList<>();
  
      public TodoList add(String title) {
          objects.add(new TodoItem(generateRandomId(), title, false));
          return this;
      }
  
      public TodoList addCompleted(String title) {
          objects.add(new TodoItem(generateRandomId(), title, true));
          return this;
      }
  
      public TodoList add(int id, String title) {
          objects.add(new TodoItem(id, title, false));
          return this;
      }
  
      personal static int generateRandomId() {
          return new Random().nextInt(0, Integer.MAX_VALUE);
      }
  }
  
  public file TodoItem(int id, String title, boolean isCompleted) {
      public boolean isActive() {
          return !isCompleted;
      }
  }

And we replace the mannequin in our check so as to add express Ids

Go – including Id within the check information

  func Test_toggleTodoItem(t *testing.T) {
    // render the preliminary HTML
    mannequin := todo.NewList().
      AddWithId(101, "One").
      AddWithId(102, "Two")
    initialHtml := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin, "/")
    // ... 
  }

Java – including Id within the check information

  @Take a look at
  void toggleTodoItem() {
      // Render the preliminary html
      TodoList mannequin = new TodoList()
              .add(101, "One")
              .add(102, "Two");
      String initialHtml = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin, "/");
  }

We are actually prepared to check consumer interplay with the web page.

Clicking on a todo merchandise

We need to simulate consumer interplay with the HTML web page. It is perhaps
tempting to proceed to make use of CSS selectors to determine the particular
checkbox that we need to click on, however there’s a greater means: there’s a
consensus amongst front-end builders that the easiest way to check
interplay with a web page is to use it
the same way that users do. For example, you do not search for a
button via a CSS locator akin to button.purchase; as a substitute,
you search for one thing clickable with the label “Purchase”. In follow,
this implies figuring out elements of the web page via their
ARIA roles.

To this finish, we add code to our check to search for a checkbox labelled
“One”:

Go

  func Test_toggleTodoItem(t *testing.T) {
    // ...
    // click on on the "One" checkbox
    checkbox := web page.GetByRole(*playwright.AriaRoleCheckbox, playwright.PageGetByRoleOptions{Identify: "One"})
    if err := checkbox.Click on(); err != nil {
      t.Deadly(err)
    }
  }

Java

  @Take a look at
  void toggleTodoItem() {
          // ...
          // click on on the "One" checkbox
          var checkbox = web page.getByRole(AriaRole.CHECKBOX, new Web page.GetByRoleOptions().setName("One"));
          checkbox.click on();
      }
  }

We run the check, and it fails:

Go

  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  --- FAIL: Test_toggleTodoItem (32.74s)
      index_behaviour_test.go:50: playwright: timeout: Timeout 30000ms exceeded.

Java

  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() STANDARD_OUT
      >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
      Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  
  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() FAILED
      com.microsoft.playwright.TimeoutError: Error {
        message="hyperlink the label to the checkbox correctly:

generated HTML with dangerous accessibility


  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
      <label>One</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>
We repair it through the use of the for attribute within the

        template,
index.tmpl – Go

  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-{{.Id}}" class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-{{.Id}}">{{.Title}}</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>
index.tmpl – Java

  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-{{ id }}" class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-{{ id }}">{{ title }}</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>
In order that it generates correct, accessible HTML:
generated HTML with higher accessibility

  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-101" class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-101">One</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>
We run once more the check, and it passes. 
On this part we noticed how testing the HTML in the identical was as customers

        work together with it led us to make use of ARIA roles, which led to bettering

        accessibility of our generated HTML. Within the subsequent part, we are going to see

        the right way to check that the press on a todo merchandise triggers a distant name to the

        server, that ought to lead to swapping part of the present HTML with

        the HTML returned by the XHR name.

Spherical-trip to the server

Now we are going to prolong our check. We inform the check that if name to
POST /toggle/101 is acquired, it ought to return some
stubbed HTML.

Go

  } else if route.Request().URL() == "http://localhost:4567/toggle/101" && route.Request().Methodology() == "POST" {
    // we anticipate {that a} POST /toggle/101 request is made once we click on on the "One" checkbox
    const stubbedHtml = `
      <part class="todoapp">
        <p>Stubbed html</p>
      </part>`
    stubResponse(route, stubbedHtml, "textual content/html")

Java

  } else if (route.request().url().equals("http://localhost:4567/toggle/101") && route.request().methodology().equals("POST")) {
      // we anticipate {that a} POST /toggle/101 request is made once we click on on the "One" checkbox
      String stubbedHtml = """
          <part class="todoapp">
              <p>Stubbed html</p>
          </part>
          """;
      route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
              .setContentType("textual content/html")
              .setBody(stubbedHtml));

And we stub the loading of the HTMX library, which we load from a
native file:

Go

  } else if route.Request().URL() == "https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12" {
    // serve the htmx library
    stubResponse(route, readFile("testdata/htmx.min.js"), "software/javascript")

Go

  } else if (route.request().url().equals("https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12")) {
      // serve the htmx library
      route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
              .setContentType("textual content/html")
              .setBody(readFile("/htmx.min.js")));

Lastly, we add the expectation that, after we click on the checkbox,
the part of the HTML that comprises many of the software is
reloaded.

Go

  // click on on the "One" checkbox
  checkbox := web page.GetByRole(*playwright.AriaRoleCheckbox, playwright.PageGetByRoleOptions{Identify: "One"})
  if err := checkbox.Click on(); err != nil {
    t.Deadly(err)
  }

  // examine that the web page has been up to date
  doc := parseHtml(t, content material(t, web page))
  components := doc.Discover("physique > part.todoapp > p")
  assert.Equal(t, "Stubbed html", components.Textual content(), should(web page.Content material()))

java

  // click on on the "One" checkbox
  var checkbox = web page.getByRole(AriaRole.CHECKBOX, new Web page.GetByRoleOptions().setName("One"));
  checkbox.click on();

  // examine that the web page has been up to date
  var doc = parseHtml(web page.content material());
  var components = doc.choose("physique > part.todoapp > p");
  assertThat(components.textual content())
          .describedAs(web page.content material())
          .isEqualTo("Stubbed html");

We run the check, and it fails, as anticipated. With a purpose to perceive
why precisely it fails, we add to the error message the entire HTML
doc.

Go

  assert.Equal(t, "Stubbed html", components.Textual content(), should(web page.Content material()))

Java

  assertThat(components.textual content())
          .describedAs(web page.content material())
          .isEqualTo("Stubbed html");

The error message could be very verbose, however we see that the explanation it
fails is that we do not see the stubbed HTML within the output. This implies
that the web page didn’t make the anticipated XHR name.

Go – Java is analogous

  --- FAIL: Test_toggleTodoItem (2.75s)
  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
      index_behaviour_test.go:67:
            Error Hint:  .../index_behaviour_test.go:67
            Error:        Not equal:
                          anticipated: "Stubbed html"
                          precise  : ""
                          ...
            Take a look at:         Test_toggleTodoItem
            Messages:     <!DOCTYPE html><html lang="en"><head>
                              <meta charset="utf-8">
                              <meta title="viewport" content material="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
                              <title>Template • TodoMVC</title>
                              <script src="https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12"></script>
                            <physique>
                              <part class="todoapp">
                          ...
                                    <li class="">
                                      <div class="view">
                                        <enter id="checkbox-101" class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
                                        <label for="checkbox-101">One</label>
                                        <button class="destroy"></button>
                                      </div>
                                    </li>
                          ...

We are able to make this check cross by altering the HTML template to make use of HTMX
to make an XHR name again to the server. First we load the HTMX
library:

index.tmpl

  <title>Template • TodoMVC</title>
  <script src="https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12"></script>

Then we add the HTMX attributes to the checkboxes:

index.tmpl

  <enter
      data-hx-post="/toggle/{{.Id}}"
      data-hx-target="part.todoapp"
      id="checkbox-{{.Id}}"
      class="toggle"
      sort="checkbox">

The data-hx-post annotation will make HTMX do a POST
name to the desired url. The data-hx-target tells HTMX
to repeat the HTML returned by the decision, to the aspect specified by the
part.todoapp CSS locator.

We run once more the check, and it nonetheless fails!

Go – Java is analogous

  --- FAIL: Test_toggleTodoItem (2.40s)
  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> GET https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12
  << 200 https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> POST http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
      index_behaviour_test.go:67:
            Error Hint:  .../index_behaviour_test.go:67
            Error:        Not equal:
                          anticipated: "Stubbed html"
                          precise  : ""
                          ...
            Take a look at:         Test_toggleTodoItem
            Messages:     <!DOCTYPE html><html lang="en"><head>
                              <meta charset="utf-8">
                              <meta title="viewport" content material="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
                              <title>Template • TodoMVC</title>
                              <script src="https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12"></script>
                          ...
                            <physique>
                              <part class="todoapp"><part class="todoapp">
                                    <p>Stubbed html</p>
                                  </part></part>
                          ...
                          </physique></html>

The log traces present that the POST name occurred as anticipated, however
examination of the error message reveals that the HTML construction we
anticipated isn’t there: we’ve got a part.todoapp nested
inside one other. Which means that we aren’t utilizing the HTMX annotations
accurately, and reveals why this type of check might be precious. We add the
lacking annotation

index.tmpl

  <enter
      data-hx-post="/toggle/{{.Id}}"
      data-hx-target="part.todoapp"
      data-hx-swap="outerHTML"
      id="checkbox-{{.Id}}"
      class="toggle"
      sort="checkbox">

The default behaviour of HTMX is to interchange the interior HTML of the
goal aspect. The data-hx-swap=”outerHTML” annotation
tells HTMX to interchange the outer HTML as a substitute.

and we check once more, and this time it passes!

Go

  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> GET https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12
  << 200 https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> POST http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  --- PASS: Test_toggleTodoItem (1.39s)

Java

  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() STANDARD_OUT
      >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
      >> GET https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12
      << 200 https://unpkg.com/htmx.org@1.9.12
      Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
      >> POST http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  
  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() PASSED

On this part we noticed the right way to write a check for the behaviour of our
HTML that, whereas utilizing the sophisticated equipment of a headless browser,
nonetheless feels extra like a unit check than an integration check. It’s in
truth testing simply an HTML web page with any related CSS and JavaScript,
in isolation from different elements of the applying akin to controllers,
providers or repositories.

The check prices 2-3 seconds of ready time for the headless browser to come back up, which is normally an excessive amount of for a unit check; nevertheless, like a unit check, it is extremely steady, as it’s not flaky, and its failures are documented with a comparatively clear error message.

See the ultimate model of the check in Go and in Java.