Missing transformation for Jasmine mock return values about jest-codemods

[skovhus]

@jwedel thanks for reporting this. And let me know if you are up for creating a PR fixing this.

[jwedel]

@skovhus I've created a PR with a failing test but I have no idea how to fix this. I've looked at the jasmine-globals.ts but I can't figure out where to start...

[jwedel]

I figured out that it is possible to replace

focusMonitorMock.monitor.and.returnValue(of()); 

by

focusMonitorMock.monitor.mockReturnValue(of()); 

I've changed the test and finally figured out how to write transformation that makes the tests green.

However, I have to say that the implementation is very hard to read and understand, especially the reverse tree is messing with my mind. Moreover, IMO it's pretty bad that the actual test() call is wrapped in a reusable function. That makes debugging and running of individual tests pretty hard.

[skovhus]

IMO it's pretty bad that the actual test() call is wrapped in a reusable function. That makes debugging and running of individual tests pretty hard.

I see what you are saying. For running individual tests you can run yarn test:watch (Jest in watch mode) and filter the tests by test name. Example:

• yarn test:watch
• press w for menu
• press t for test name filtering
• type maps expect within matchers and enter

Or you can just watch failed tests or test that are modified.

[jwedel]

@skovhus Yes, that can be done. However, I am using my IDEs functionality (IntellIJ in this case) to run individual tests. But that only works if there are actual tests that can be discovered. Moreover, I don't see any need to handle it the way it is right now. I would suggest to do change the structure like that:

test('My name', () => {
   assertTransformation('input', 'output')
})

function assertTransformation(source, expectedOutput) {
    const result = wrappedPlugin(source)
    expect(result).toBe(expectedOutput)
}

That still allows using jest functionalility plus using an IDE to run tests.

[skovhus]

I would suggest to do change the structure like that:

That is a great idea. Let me know if you are up for fixing it. :)

[jwedel]

I would suggest to do change the structure like that:

That is a great idea. Let me know if you are up for fixing it. :)

Done with #202 thanks to heavy use of multi-cursor actions :)