test(commons): migrate to vitest #3060
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
boring-cyborg
bot
added
automation
leandrodamascena
previously approved these changes
Sep 16, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @dreamorosi! I left some small comments, but it doesn't affect this migration if you don't accept it.
Approving.
leandrodamascena
previously approved these changes
Sep 16, 2024
|
leandrodamascena
approved these changes
Sep 16, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Changes
This PR switches the test runner of the
commonspackage from Jest to Vitest, continuing the migration effort for the project.The PR is relatively small and focuses primarily in: 1/ changing the imports to
vitestspecific ones, 2/ standardizing the test headers, and 3/ updating the commands & configs to suit the new runner.The only notable change of the PR is that Vitest supports type testing, which opens up new possibilities for our tests. Concretely this PR introduces the first "unit" test for types around the
LambdaInterfacetype. We'll be experimenting with more tests of this kind in the future.Issue number: closes #3059
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.
Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.