After a decade or extra the place Single-Web page-Functions generated by
JavaScript frameworks have
become the norm, we see that server-side rendered HTML is turning into
common once more, additionally because of libraries reminiscent of HTMX or Turbo. Writing a wealthy internet UI in a
historically server-side language like Go or Java is not simply attainable,
however a really engaging proposition.
We then face the issue of the right way to write automated checks for the HTML
elements of our internet purposes. Whereas the JavaScript world has advanced powerful and sophisticated methods to check the UI,
ranging in dimension from unit-level to integration to end-to-end, in different
languages we don’t have such a richness of instruments obtainable.
When writing an internet utility in Go or Java, HTML is usually generated
by templates, which comprise small fragments of logic. It’s definitely
attainable to check them not directly by end-to-end checks, however these checks
are gradual and costly.
We will as an alternative write unit checks that use CSS selectors to probe the
presence and proper content material of particular HTML parts inside a doc.
Parameterizing these checks makes it straightforward so as to add new checks and to obviously
point out what particulars every check is verifying. This method works with any
language that has entry to an HTML parsing library that helps CSS
selectors; examples are supplied in Go and Java.
Stage 1: checking for sound HTML
The primary factor we need to examine is that the HTML we produce is
mainly sound. I do not imply to examine that HTML is legitimate in response to the
W3C; it could be cool to do it, however it’s higher to begin with a lot less complicated and quicker checks.
For example, we wish our checks to
break if the template generates one thing like
<div>foo</p>
Let’s have a look at the right way to do it in levels: we begin with the next check that
tries to compile the template. In Go we use the usual html/template
bundle.
Go
func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) { templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl")) _ = templ }
In Java, we use jmustache
as a result of it is quite simple to make use of; Freemarker or
Velocity are different widespread decisions.
Java
@Take a look at void indexIsSoundHtml() { var template = Mustache.compiler().compile( new InputStreamReader( getClass().getResourceAsStream("/index.tmpl"))); }
If we run this check, it’s going to fail, as a result of the index.tmpl
file does
not exist. So we create it, with the above damaged HTML. Now the check ought to move.
Then we create a mannequin for the template to make use of. The applying manages a todo-list, and
we will create a minimal mannequin for demonstration functions.
Go
func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) {
templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl"))
mannequin := todo.NewList()
_ = templ
_ = mannequin
}
Java
@Take a look at
void indexIsSoundHtml() {
var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
new InputStreamReader(
getClass().getResourceAsStream("/index.tmpl")));
var mannequin = new TodoList();
}
Now we render the template, saving the leads to a bytes buffer (Go) or as a String
(Java).
Go
func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) {
templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl"))
mannequin := todo.NewList()
var buf bytes.Buffer
err := templ.Execute(&buf, mannequin)
if err != nil {
panic(err)
}
}
Java
@Take a look at
void indexIsSoundHtml() {
var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
new InputStreamReader(
getClass().getResourceAsStream("/index.tmpl")));
var mannequin = new TodoList();
var html = template.execute(mannequin);
}
At this level, we need to parse the HTML and we anticipate to see an
error, as a result of in our damaged HTML there’s a div
aspect that
is closed by a p
aspect. There may be an HTML parser within the Go
normal library, however it’s too lenient: if we run it on our damaged HTML, we do not get an
error. Fortunately, the Go normal library additionally has an XML parser that may be
configured to parse HTML (because of this Stack Overflow answer)
Go
func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) {
templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl"))
mannequin := todo.NewList()
// render the template right into a buffer
var buf bytes.Buffer
err := templ.Execute(&buf, mannequin)
if err != nil {
panic(err)
}
// examine that the template could be parsed as (lenient) XML
decoder := xml.NewDecoder(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
decoder.Strict = false
decoder.AutoClose = xml.HTMLAutoClose
decoder.Entity = xml.HTMLEntity
for {
_, err := decoder.Token()
change err {
case io.EOF:
return // We're executed, it is legitimate!
case nil:
// do nothing
default:
t.Fatalf("Error parsing html: %s", err)
}
}
}
This code configures the HTML parser to have the precise degree of leniency
for HTML, after which parses the HTML token by token. Certainly, we see the error
message we wished:
--- FAIL: Test_wellFormedHtml (0.00s) index_template_test.go:61: Error parsing html: XML syntax error on line 4: surprising finish aspect </p>
In Java, a flexible library to make use of is jsoup:
Java
@Take a look at
void indexIsSoundHtml() {
var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
new InputStreamReader(
getClass().getResourceAsStream("/index.tmpl")));
var mannequin = new TodoList();
var html = template.execute(mannequin);
var parser = Parser.htmlParser().setTrackErrors(10);
Jsoup.parse(html, "", parser);
assertThat(parser.getErrors()).isEmpty();
}
And we see it fail:
java.lang.AssertionError: Anticipating empty however was:<[<1:13>: Unexpected EndTag token [</p>] when in state [InBody],
Success! Now if we copy over the contents of the TodoMVC
template to our index.tmpl
file, the check passes.
The check, nevertheless, is just too verbose: we extract two helper features, in
order to make the intention of the check clearer, and we get
Go
func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) { mannequin := todo.NewList() buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin) assertWellFormedHtml(t, buf) }
Java
@Take a look at void indexIsSoundHtml() { var mannequin = new TodoList(); var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin); assertSoundHtml(html); }
Stage 2: testing HTML construction
What else ought to we check?
We all know that the appears to be like 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. Nonetheless, there may be typically
logic in templates, and we wish to have the ability to check that logic.
One may be tempted to check the rendered HTML with string equality,
however this method fails in observe, as a result of templates comprise plenty of
particulars that make string equality assertions impractical. The assertions
develop into very verbose, and when studying the assertion, it turns into tough
to know 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 small print we do not
care about. A technique to do that is by working queries with the CSS selector language:
it’s a highly effective language that enables us to pick out the
parts that we care about from the entire HTML doc. As soon as now we have
chosen these parts, 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 presupposed to generate appears to be like like this:
There are a number of particulars which can be rendered dynamically:
- The variety of gadgets and their textual content content material change, clearly
- The fashion of the todo-item modifications when it is accomplished (e.g., the
second) - The “2 gadgets left” textual content will change with the variety of non-completed
gadgets - One of many three buttons “All”, “Lively”, “Accomplished” might be
highlighted, relying on the present url; for example if we determine that the
url that exhibits solely the “Lively” gadgets is/lively
, then when the present url
is/lively
, the “Lively” button ought to be surrounded by a skinny pink
rectangle - The “Clear accomplished” button ought to solely be seen if any merchandise is
accomplished
Every of this issues could 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, supplied for instance:
index.tmpl
<part class="todoapp"> <ul class="todo-list"> <!-- These are right here simply to point out the construction of the record gadgets --> <!-- Checklist gadgets 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 gadgets 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="#/lively">Lively</a> </li> <li> <a href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a> </li> </ul> <!-- Hidden if no accomplished gadgets are left ↓ --> <button class="clear-completed">Clear accomplished</button> ⑤ </footer> </part>
By trying on the static model of the template, we will deduce which
CSS selectors can be utilized to establish the related parts for the 5 dynamic
options listed above:
characteristic | CSS selector | |
---|---|---|
① | All of the gadgets | ul.todo-list li |
② | Accomplished gadgets | ul.todo-list li.accomplished |
⓷ | Objects left | span.todo-count |
④ | Highlighted navigation hyperlink | ul.filters a.chosen |
⑤ | Clear accomplished button | button.clear-completed |
We will use these selectors to focus our checks on simply the issues we need to check.
Testing HTML content material
The primary check will search for all of the gadgets, 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> parts 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 strategy to question the HTML doc with our CSS selector; a very good
library for Go is goquery, that implements an API impressed by jQuery.
In Java, we hold 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> parts 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 { // A little bit mess because of the truth that goquery has // a .Textual content() technique on Choice however not on html.Node sel := goquery.Choice{Nodes: []*html.Node{node}} return strings.TrimSpace(sel.Textual content()) }
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> parts 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"); }
If we nonetheless have not modified the template to populate the record from the
mannequin, this check will fail, as a result of the static template
todo gadgets have completely different textual content:
Go
--- FAIL: Test_todoItemsAreShown (0.00s) index_template_test.go:44: First record merchandise: need Foo, received Style JavaScript index_template_test.go:49: Second record merchandise: need Bar, received 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 knowledge:
Go
<ul class="todo-list"> {{ vary .Objects }} <li> <div class="view"> <enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox"> <label>{{ .Title }}</label> <button class="destroy"></button> </div> </li> {{ finish }} </ul>
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>
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’ll have extra
checks, they’ll develop into repetitive and tough to learn, so we make it extra concise by extracting a helper perform 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"); } non-public static Doc parseHtml(String html) { return Jsoup.parse(html, ""); }
Significantly better! At the very least 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
}
Java
non-public static Doc parseHtml(String html) { var parser = Parser.htmlParser().setTrackErrors(10); var doc = Jsoup.parse(html, "", parser); assertThat(parser.getErrors()).isEmpty(); return doc; }
And with this, we will 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 a very good place for testing extra rendering logic. The
second dynamic characteristic in our record is “Checklist gadgets ought to get the category
accomplished
when marked as accomplished”. We will 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])) }
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"); }
And this check could be made inexperienced by including this little bit of logic to the
template:
Go
<ul class="todo-list">
{{ vary .Objects }}
<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>
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>
So little by little, we will check and add the varied dynamic options
that our template ought to have.
Make it straightforward so as to add new checks
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 circumstances“. Certainly, in Go there
is a bent to make most checks parameterized, for this very cause.
Alternatively, whereas Java has
good support
for parameterized tests with JUnit 5, they are not used as a lot.
Since our present two checks have the identical construction, we
might issue them right into a single parameterized check.
A check case for us will include:
- A reputation (in order that we will 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 after we run the CSS
selector on the rendered HTML.
So that is the information construction for our check circumstances:
Go
var testCases = []struct { title string mannequin *todo.Checklist selector string matches []string }{ { title: "all todo gadgets are proven", mannequin: todo.NewList(). Add("Foo"). Add("Bar"), selector: "ul.todo-list li", matches: []string{"Foo", "Bar"}, }, { title: "accomplished gadgets get the 'accomplished' class", mannequin: todo.NewList(). Add("Foo"). AddCompleted("Bar"), selector: "ul.todo-list li.accomplished", matches: []string{"Bar"}, }, }
Java
document 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 gadgets are proven", new TodoList() .add("Foo") .add("Bar"), "ul.todo-list li", Checklist.of("Foo", "Bar")), new TestCase( "accomplished gadgets get the 'accomplished' class", new TodoList() .add("Foo") .addCompleted("Bar"), "ul.todo-list li.accomplished", Checklist.of("Bar")), }; }
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), "surprising # of matches") for i, node := vary choice.Nodes { assert.Equal(t, check.matches[i], textual content(node)) } }) } }
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.dimension()); for (int i = 0; i < check.matches.dimension(); i++) { assertThat(choice.get(i).textual content()).isEqualTo(check.matches.get(i)); } }
We will now run our parameterized check and see it move:
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 gadgets are proven PASSED IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [2] accomplished gadgets get the 'accomplished' class PASSED
Observe how, by giving a reputation to our check circumstances, we get very readable check output, each on the terminal and within the IDE:
Having rewritten our two outdated checks in desk kind, it is now tremendous straightforward so as to add
one other. That is the check for the “x gadgets left” textual content:
Go
{ title: "gadgets left", mannequin: todo.NewList(). Add("One"). Add("Two"). AddCompleted("Three"), selector: "span.todo-count", matches: []string{"2 gadgets left"}, },
Java
new TestCase( "gadgets left", new TodoList() .add("One") .add("Two") .addCompleted("Three"), "span.todo-count", Checklist.of("2 gadgets left")),
And the corresponding change within the html template is:
Go
<span class="todo-count"><sturdy>{{len .ActiveItems}}</sturdy> gadgets left</span>
Java – jmustache
<span class="todo-count"><sturdy>{{activeItemsCount}}</sturdy> gadgets left</span>
The above change within the template requires a supporting technique within the mannequin:
Go
sort Merchandise struct {
Title string
IsCompleted bool
}
sort Checklist struct {
Objects []*Merchandise
}
func (l *Checklist) ActiveItems() []*Merchandise {
var consequence []*Merchandise
for _, merchandise := vary l.Objects {
if !merchandise.IsCompleted {
consequence = append(consequence, merchandise)
}
}
return consequence
}
Java
public class TodoList {
non-public remaining Checklist<TodoItem> gadgets = new ArrayList<>();
// ...
public lengthy activeItemsCount() {
return gadgets.stream().filter(TodoItem::isActive).depend();
}
}
We have invested a bit of effort in our testing infrastructure, in order that including new
check circumstances is simpler. Within the subsequent part, we’ll see that the necessities
for the subsequent check circumstances will push us to refine our check infrastructure additional.
Making the desk extra expressive, on the expense of the check code
We’ll now check the “All”, “Lively” and “Accomplished” navigation hyperlinks at
the underside of the UI (see the picture above),
and these rely on which url we’re visiting, which is
one thing that our template has no strategy to discover out.
At the moment, all we move to our template is our mannequin, which is a todo-list.
It isn’t appropriate so as to add the presently visited url to the mannequin, as a result of that’s
person navigation state, not utility state.
So we have to move extra info to the template past the mannequin. A straightforward method
is to move a map, which we assemble in our
renderTemplate
perform:
Go
func renderTemplate(mannequin *todo.Checklist, path string) bytes.Buffer { templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl")) var buf bytes.Buffer knowledge := map[string]any{ "mannequin": mannequin, "path": path, } err := templ.Execute(&buf, knowledge) if err != nil { panic(err) } return buf }
Java
non-public String renderTemplate(String templateName, TodoList mannequin, String path) { var template = Mustache.compiler().compile( new InputStreamReader( getClass().getResourceAsStream(templateName))); var knowledge = Map.of( "mannequin", mannequin, "path", path ); return template.execute(knowledge); }
And correspondingly our check circumstances desk has yet another discipline:
Go
var testCases = []struct { title string mannequin *todo.Checklist path string selector string matches []string }{ { title: "all todo gadgets are proven", mannequin: todo.NewList(). Add("Foo"). Add("Bar"), selector: "ul.todo-list li", matches: []string{"Foo", "Bar"}, }, // ... the opposite circumstances { title: "highlighted navigation hyperlink: All", path: "/", selector: "ul.filters a.chosen", matches: []string{"All"}, }, { title: "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Lively", path: "/lively", selector: "ul.filters a.chosen", matches: []string{"Lively"}, }, { title: "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished", path: "/accomplished", selector: "ul.filters a.chosen", matches: []string{"Accomplished"}, }, }
Java
document 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 gadgets are proven", new TodoList() .add("Foo") .add("Bar"), "/", "ul.todo-list li", Checklist.of("Foo", "Bar")), // ... the earlier circumstances new TestCase( "highlighted navigation hyperlink: All", new TodoList(), "/", "ul.filters a.chosen", Checklist.of("All")), new TestCase( "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Lively", new TodoList(), "/lively", "ul.filters a.chosen", Checklist.of("Lively")), new TestCase( "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished", new TodoList(), "/accomplished", "ul.filters a.chosen", Checklist.of("Accomplished")), }; }
We discover that for the three new circumstances, the mannequin is irrelevant;
whereas for the earlier circumstances, the trail is irrelevant. The Go syntax permits us
to initialize a struct with simply the fields we’re concerned with, however Java doesn’t have
an analogous characteristic, so we’re pushed to move additional info, and this makes the check circumstances
desk tougher to know.
A developer would possibly have a look at the primary check case and marvel if the anticipated conduct relies upon
on the trail being set to “/”
, and may be tempted so as to add extra circumstances with
a unique path. In the identical method, when studying the
highlighted navigation hyperlink check circumstances, the developer would possibly marvel if the
anticipated conduct depends upon the mannequin being set to an empty todo record. If that’s the case, one would possibly
be led so as to add irrelevant check circumstances 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
knowledge to our check case. In Java we’d move null
for the
irrelevant fields, however there’s a greater method: we will use
the builder pattern,
popularized by Joshua Bloch.
We will shortly write one for the Java TestCase
document this fashion:
Java
document 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 bit of tedious, however doable, although there are
automated ways to write down them.
Now we will rewrite our Java check circumstances with the Builder
, to
obtain larger readability:
Java
public static TestCase[] indexTestCases() { return new TestCase[]{ new TestCase.Builder() .title("all todo gadgets are proven") .mannequin(new TodoList() .add("Foo") .add("Bar")) .selector("ul.todo-list li") .matches("Foo", "Bar") .construct(), // ... different circumstances 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 checks? At current, they fail for the incorrect cause: null-pointer exceptions
as a result of lacking mannequin
and path
values.
So as to get our new check circumstances to fail for the precise cause, specifically that the template does
not but have logic to spotlight the proper hyperlink, we should
present default values for mannequin
and path
. In Go, we will do that
within the check technique:
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
})
}
}
In Java, we will 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; // ... }
With these modifications, we see that the final two check circumstances, those for the highlighted hyperlink Lively
and Accomplished fail, for the anticipated cause 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: "Lively" 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: Lively FAILED org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError: Anticipating: <"All"> to be equal to: <"Lively"> 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 checks move, we make these modifications 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 "/lively" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/lively">Lively</a> </li> <li> <a class="{{ if eq .path "/accomplished" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a> </li> </ul>
Java – jmustache
<ul class="filters"> <li> <a class="{{ #pathRoot }}chosen{{ /pathRoot }}" href="#/">All</a> </li> <li> <a class="{{ #pathActive }}chosen{{ /pathActive }}" href="#/lively">Lively</a> </li> <li> <a class="{{ #pathCompleted }}chosen{{ /pathCompleted }}" href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a> </li> </ul>
For the reason that Mustache template language doesn’t enable for equality testing, we should change the
knowledge handed to the template in order that we execute the equality checks earlier than rendering the template:
Java
non-public String renderTemplate(String templateName, TodoList mannequin, String path) { var template = Mustache.compiler().compile( new InputStreamReader( getClass().getResourceAsStream(templateName))); var knowledge = Map.of( "mannequin", mannequin, "pathRoot", path.equals("/"), "pathActive", path.equals("/lively"), "pathCompleted", path.equals("/accomplished") ); return template.execute(knowledge); }
And with these modifications, all of our checks now move.
To recap this part, we made the check code a bit of bit extra sophisticated, in order that the check
circumstances are clearer: it is a excellent tradeoff!
Stage 3: testing HTML behaviour
Within the story thus far, we examined the behaviour of the HTML
templates, by checking the construction of the generated HTML.
That is good, however what if we wished to check the behaviour of the HTML
itself, plus any CSS and JavaScript it could use?
The behaviour of HTML by itself is often fairly apparent, as a result of
there may be not a lot of it. The one parts that may work together with the
person are the anchor (<a>
), <kind>
and
<enter>
parts, however the image modifications fully when
we add CSS, that may cover, present, transfer round issues and much extra, and
with JavaScript, that may add any behaviour to a web page.
In an utility that’s primarily rendered server-side, we anticipate
that almost all behaviour is carried out by returning new HTML with a
round-trip to the person, and this may be examined adequately with the
methods we have seen thus far, however what if we wished to hurry up the
utility behaviour with a library reminiscent of HTMX? This library works by particular
attributes which can be added to parts so as to add Ajax behaviour. These
attributes are in impact a DSL that we’d need to
check.
How can we check the mixture of HTML, CSS and JavaScript in
a unit check?
Testing HTML, CSS and JavaScript requires one thing that is ready to
interpret and execute their behaviours; in different phrases, we want a
browser! It’s customary to make use of headless browsers in end-to-end checks;
can we use them for unitary checks as an alternative? I feel that is attainable,
utilizing the next methods, though I need to admit I’ve but to attempt
this on an actual challenge.
We’ll use the Playwright
library, that’s obtainable for each Go and
Java. The checks we
are going to write down might be slower, as a result of we should wait a number of
seconds for the headless browser to begin, however will retain a few of the
essential traits of unit checks, primarily that we’re testing
simply the HTML (and any related CSS and JavaScript), in isolation from
every other server-side logic.
Persevering with with the TodoMVC
instance, the subsequent factor we’d need to check is what occurs when the
person clicks on the checkbox of a todo merchandise. What we would prefer to occur is
that:
- A POST name to the server is made, in order that the applying is aware of
that the state of a todo merchandise has modified - The server returns new HTML for the dynamic a part of the web page,
specifically the entire part with class “todoapp”, in order that we will present the
new state of the applying together with the depend of remaining “lively”
gadgets (see the template above) - The web page replaces the outdated contents of the “todoapp” part with
the brand new ones.
Loading the web page within the Playwright browser
We begin with a check that can simply load the preliminary HTML. The check
is a bit of concerned, so I present the entire 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 surprising requests panic("surprising 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("surprising standing: %d", response.Standing()) } }
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, "/"); attempt (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 surprising calls fail(String.format("Surprising request: %s %s", route.request().technique(), route.request().url())); } }); // load preliminary html web page.navigate("http://localhost:4567/index.html"); } } }
Firstly of the check, we initialize the mannequin with two todo
gadgets “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 can begin a headless
browser
Go
web page := openPage() defer web page.Shut() logActivity(web page)
Java
attempt (Web page web page = browser.newPage()) { logActivity(web page);
The openPage
perform 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
perform gives 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.Technique(), 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
non-public void logActivity(Web page web page) { web page.onRequest(request -> System.out.printf(">> %s %spercentn", request.technique(), 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 surprising requests
panic("surprising 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 surprising calls
fail(String.format("Surprising request: %s %s", route.request().technique(), 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 capable of load arbitrary HTML in a
headless browser. Within the subsequent sections we’ll see the right way to simulate person
interplay with parts of the web page, and observe the web page’s
behaviour. However first we have to resolve an issue with the shortage of
identifiers in our area mannequin.
Figuring out todo gadgets
Now we need to click on on the “One” checkbox. The issue now we have is
that at current, now we have no strategy to establish particular person todo gadgets, so
we introduce an Id
discipline 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.Objects = append(l.Objects, &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.Objects = append(l.Objects, &merchandise) return l } func generateRandomId() int { return abs(rand.Int()) }
Java – up to date mannequin with Id
public class TodoList { non-public remaining Checklist<TodoItem> gadgets = new ArrayList<>(); public TodoList add(String title) { gadgets.add(new TodoItem(generateRandomId(), title, false)); return this; } public TodoList addCompleted(String title) { gadgets.add(new TodoItem(generateRandomId(), title, true)); return this; } public TodoList add(int id, String title) { gadgets.add(new TodoItem(id, title, false)); return this; } non-public static int generateRandomId() { return new Random().nextInt(0, Integer.MAX_VALUE); } } public document TodoItem(int id, String title, boolean isCompleted) { public boolean isActive() { return !isCompleted; } }
And we replace the mannequin in our check so as to add specific Ids
Go – including Id within the check knowledge
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 knowledge
@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 person interplay with the web page.
Clicking on a todo merchandise
We need to simulate person interplay with the HTML web page. It may be
tempting to proceed to make use of CSS selectors to establish the precise
checkbox that we need to click on, however there’s a greater method: 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 by a CSS locator reminiscent of button.purchase
; as an alternative,
you search for one thing clickable with the label “Purchase”. In observe,
this implies figuring out elements of the web page by 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 unhealthy accessibility
<li>
<div class="view">
<enter class="toggle" sort="checkbox">
<label>One</label>
<button class="destroy"></button>
</div>
</li>
We repair it by utilizing 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 enhancing
accessibility of our generated HTML. Within the subsequent part, we'll see
the right way to check that the clicking 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’ll prolong our check. We inform the check that if name to
POST /toggle/101
is obtained, it ought to return some
stubbed HTML.
Go
} else if route.Request().URL() == "http://localhost:4567/toggle/101" && route.Request().Technique() == "POST" { // we anticipate {that a} POST /toggle/101 request is made after 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().technique().equals("POST")) { // we anticipate {that a} POST /toggle/101 request is made after 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"), "utility/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 utility 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)) parts := doc.Discover("physique > part.todoapp > p") assert.Equal(t, "Stubbed html", parts.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 parts = doc.choose("physique > part.todoapp > p"); assertThat(parts.textual content()) .describedAs(web page.content material()) .isEqualTo("Stubbed html");
We run the check, and it fails, as anticipated. So as to perceive
why precisely it fails, we add to the error message the entire HTML
doc.
Go
assert.Equal(t, "Stubbed html", parts.Textual content(), should(web page.Content material()))
Java
assertThat(parts.textual content())
.describedAs(web page.content material())
.isEqualTo("Stubbed html");
The error message may 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 comparable
--- 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 will make this check move 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 required 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 comparable
--- 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 strains present that the POST name occurred as anticipated, however
examination of the error message exhibits that the HTML construction we
anticipated shouldn’t be there: now we have a part.todoapp
nested
inside one other. Because of this we’re not utilizing the HTMX annotations
accurately, and exhibits why this sort of check could 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 switch the inside HTML of the
goal aspect. The data-hx-swap=”outerHTML”
annotation
tells HTMX to switch the outer HTML as an alternative.
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
reality testing simply an HTML web page with any related CSS and JavaScript,
in isolation from different elements of the applying reminiscent of controllers,
providers or repositories.
The check prices 2-3 seconds of ready time for the headless browser to return up, which is often an excessive amount of for a unit check; nevertheless, like a unit check, it is vitally steady, as it isn’t flaky, and its failures are documented with a comparatively clear error message.
Bonus degree: Stringly asserted
Esko Luontola, TDD skilled and creator of the net course tdd.mooc.fi, suggested an alternative to testing HTML with CSS selectors: the concept is to remodel HTML right into a human-readable canonical kind.
Let’s take for instance this snippet of generated HTML:
<ul class="todo-list"> <li class=""> <div class="view"> <enter id="checkbox-100" class="toggle" sort="checkbox"> <label for="checkbox-100">One</label> <button class="destroy"></button> </div> </li> <li class=""> <div class="view"> <enter id="checkbox-200" class="toggle" sort="checkbox"> <label for="checkbox-200">Two</label> <button class="destroy"></button> </div> </li> <li class="accomplished"> <div class="view"> <enter id="checkbox-300" class="toggle" sort="checkbox"> <label for="checkbox-300">Three</label> <button class="destroy"></button> </div> </li> </ul>
We might visualize the above HTML by:
- deleting all HTML tags
- decreasing each sequence of whitespace characters to a single clean
to reach at:
One Two Three
This, nevertheless, removes an excessive amount of of the HTML construction to be helpful. For example, it doesn’t allow us to distinguish between lively and accomplished gadgets. Some HTML aspect characterize seen content material: for example
<enter worth="foo" />
exhibits a textual content field with the phrase “foo” that is a vital a part of the method we understand HTML. To visualise these parts, Esko suggests so as to add a data-test-icon
attribute that provides some textual content for use rather than the aspect when visualizing it for testing. With this,
<enter worth="foo" data-test-icon="[foo]" />
the enter aspect is visualized as [foo]
, with the sq. brackets hinting that the phrase “foo” sits inside an editable textual content field. Now if we add test-icons to our HTML template,
Go — Java is comparable
<ul class="todo-list"> {{ vary .mannequin.AllItems }} <li class="{{ if .IsCompleted }}accomplished{{ finish }}"> <div class="view"> <enter data-hx-post="/toggle/{{ .Id }}" data-hx-target="part.todoapp" data-hx-swap="outerHTML" id="checkbox-{{ .Id }}" class="toggle" sort="checkbox" data-test-icon="{{ if .IsCompleted }}✅{{ else }}⬜{{ finish }}"> <label for="checkbox-{{ .Id }}">{{ .Title }}</label> <button class="destroy" data-test-icon="❌️"></button> </div> </li> {{ finish }} </ul>
we will assert towards its canonical visible illustration like this:
Go
func Test_visualize_html_example(t *testing.T) { mannequin := todo.NewList(). Add("One"). Add("Two"). AddCompleted("Three") buf := renderTemplate("todo-list.tmpl", mannequin, "/") anticipated := ` ⬜ One ❌️ ⬜ Two ❌️ ✅ Three ❌️ ` assert.Equal(t, normalizeWhitespace(anticipated), visualizeHtml(buf.String())) }
Java
@Take a look at void visualize_html_example() { var mannequin = new TodoList() .add("One") .add("Two") .addCompleted("Three"); var html = renderTemplate("/todo-list.tmpl", mannequin, "/"); assertThat(visualizeHtml(html)) .isEqualTo(normalizeWhitespace(""" ⬜ One ❌️ ⬜ Two ❌️ ✅ Three ❌️ """)); }
Right here is Esko Luontola’s Java implementation of the 2 features that make this attainable, and my translation to Go of his code.
Go
func visualizeHtml(html string) string cite func normalizeWhitespace(s string) string { return strings.TrimSpace(replaceAll(s, "s+", " ")) } func replaceAll(src, regex, repl string) string { re := regexp.MustCompile(regex) return re.ReplaceAllString(src, repl) }
Java
public static String visualizeHtml(String html) span public static String normalizeWhitespace(String s) { return s.replaceAll("s+", " ").trim(); }
On this part, now we have seen a way for asserting HTML content material that’s a substitute for the CSS selector-based approach utilized in the remainder of the article. Esko Luontola has reported nice success with it, and I hope readers have success with it too!
This method of asserting towards massive, sophisticated knowledge constructions reminiscent of HTML pages by decreasing them to a canonical string model has no title that I do know of. Martin Fowler suggested “stringly asserted”, and from his suggestion comes the title of this part.