Pomodoro Async Test Question about testable-projects-fcc

[no-stack-dub-sack]

@sa-mm This is one of the few suites I did not write, so this is just speculation without diving in further - but your app seems to be functioning exactly as it should, except for one small thing - when you reset, or change the session time, it is a whole number rather than 25:00 - between each test, the reset button is being called, and that expects values of 5, 25, and 25:00 respectively for break, session, and timer. I'll take a closer look, but see if this changes anything?

[no-stack-dub-sack]

That could also explain the match issue, there's no colon for the regex to match

[no-stack-dub-sack]

But then, it should be calling getSeconds when the timer is paused, so not sure...

[sa-mm]

@no-stack-dub-sack Thanks for the reply! Changing the timer text to 25:00 instead of 25 helped. The tests also want me to start counting down from say, 25:00, instead of 24:59. This was the cause of several of the errors. I now have all of the tests working expect 11. It fails the first time I run it but passes after that.

In fact, the same is true for any of the tests that make use of promises. If that particular test is the first test with a promise to be run, then it will fail the first time and pass the second. (I checked this by running each of them individually.) So, it's not so much a problem specific to 11 as it is the order in which 11 appears.

I guess I'll keep poking around.

[sa-mm]

OK, got it. Thanks for the help!

[sa-mm]

Closing it.

[no-stack-dub-sack]

@sa-mm Glad to help! What did you have to end up doing to get everything working? Any suggestions on how we can change the user stories / test case instructions in a way that would have helped you get this right the first time around? I'd like to learn from this and improve if possible, this has been one of the trickier projects to test from the get go and I anticipate we will continue to run into problems unless we really get this down. Open to suggestions...

Reopening the issue for now while the conversation is ongoing, but glad you were able to work through this.

[no-stack-dub-sack]

@sa-mm Also, kudos for going straight up vanilla JS! And glad to see you running the suite outside of codepen.

[sa-mm]

Thx!

One thing might be to explicitly state that the value of 'time-left' should start with the format 'mm:ss'. It seems that some of the tests rely on that, but that initial value differs from that of the non-beta example of the project. That might trip up some people as they move to the new version. Also, fwiw, I spent a lot of time looking at the code in the tests to understand how to fix things. I'm not sure if that is intended.

I don't remember everything I changed. However, I feel like I had a project that would have passed muster for the non-beta version of the site, and yet I had to make a significant amount of changes to get all of the tests passing. I think that once the site goes live, you should be prepared for a lot of questions… :)

I'll post here if I can think of any specific issues I had.

[no-stack-dub-sack]

@sa-mm

However, I feel like I had a project that would have passed muster for the non-beta version of the site, and yet I had to make a significant amount of changes to get all of the tests passing. I think that once the site goes live, you should be prepared for a lot of questions… :)

I agree with this feeling quite strongly, and have had these exact same concerns for quite some time as we've worked on this (which is why I'd like to try to get them as smoothed out as possible), but all things considered, Quincy determined that this was the best course of action to keep things consistent, to help eliminate the need for Core Team member review (as we grow in active user base), etc. etc.

I'm afraid some users may be turned off by this, but it has been decided that this is the direction we're going in, so best thing to do is make them as good as we possibly can! So the feedback is helpful, I will make that change to the tests, especially since, as you pointed out, the non-beta version is different. Though I expect most people will never see that version if they are going through all of this the first time once the site goes live

[no-stack-dub-sack]

Also, fwiw, I spent a lot of time looking at the code in the tests to understand how to fix things. I'm not sure if that is intended.

Nope, not intended 😄 . Albeit a bit distracting, this is not necessarily a bad thing either — extra exposure to testing and things like promises can't hurt!