Add unit tests that test exported functions in src/ about belter

[kriscarilloxyz]

Mine

[mstuart]

All yours, @kriscarilloxyz !

[mnicpt]

@Cijin Absolutely! Thanks, @Cijin !

[mstuart]

Hi @kriscarilloxyz! Still want to take this? Just checking in, so that we can give others a chance if you're busy. Thanks!

[kriscarilloxyz]

@mstuart Sorry, if anyone wanna step in feel free to do so, I'll be back on Monday if it's still open. Happy hacktoberfest everyone 🥳

[mstuart]

@pushpinder107 took this up w/ #12 ! Thanks @pushpinder107 !

[mstuart]

Will keep this issue open in case anyone wants to add other unit tests!

[Cijin]

Hi, @mstuart. Can I write tests for src/dom.js to bring coverage upto 100%. If it hasn't been taken up already.

[SlyBouhafs]

Hi @mstuart, i made a PR #24 to bring src/css.js test coverage to 100%.

[mstuart]

Thanks @SlyBouhafs ! :D

[songz]

There are a LOT of useful utilities in belter, however there aren't any unit tests in this repo! 😬 If anyone's interested in picking this up, can you write unit tests for at least two files in src/?

@mstuart are these unit tests? Since they run end to end on Karma browser, they seem more like functional tests right?

[bluepnume]

I think they’re unit tests in the sense that they test individual functions in isolation — given that’s what belter exports.

But they’re not classical unit tests in two senses:

a) some of these utility functions do a decent amount of orchestration and composition. So we’re testing multiple things at once rather than a small “unit” of logic. This is more true in other repos than belter though.

b) In these repos we try to only ever test the public interface, never the implementation (as much as possible). Typical unit tests often run against functions that are not part of the public interface, and also focus too much on implementation specifics. But I think that can lead to seriously brittle tests

[mstuart]

Looks like sufficient unit tests were added last year, so marking this as closed.