Skip to content

fix(no-node-access): support user-event instances returned from custom render #1048

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

y-hsgw
Copy link
Member

@y-hsgw y-hsgw commented Jul 18, 2025

Checks

Changes

  • Improved detection of user-event calls from render-returned objects in custom testing utilities.

Context

Fixes: Comments below
#1033 (review)

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 18, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 96.47%. Comparing base (b29277f) to head (71b22e7).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1048      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.46%   96.47%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          50       50              
  Lines        2687     2695       +8     
  Branches     1112     1111       -1     
==========================================
+ Hits         2592     2600       +8     
  Misses         95       95              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Member

@Belco90 Belco90 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would this PR solve #1049 also? If so, can you add some tests to cover the reported examples?

@y-hsgw
Copy link
Member Author

y-hsgw commented Jul 25, 2025

You're right — it looks like this does cover the cases from #1049, so I've added tests for them in a757b7e.
However, those tests are currently failing. They should start passing once #1043 is merged.
I've incorporated the changes from #1043 into this branch and fixed the failing tests.
I'd appreciate it if you could review it when you have time.

@y-hsgw y-hsgw requested a review from Belco90 July 25, 2025 12:45
Belco90
Belco90 previously approved these changes Jul 28, 2025
Copy link
Member

@Belco90 Belco90 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! But codecov complains about the coverage being lower than before.

@y-hsgw
Copy link
Member Author

y-hsgw commented Jul 29, 2025

I added test in 71b22e7.

@y-hsgw y-hsgw requested a review from Belco90 July 29, 2025 13:55
georgios-goulos added a commit to camunda/camunda that referenced this pull request Aug 1, 2025
## Description

<!-- Describe the goal and purpose of this PR. -->

The ESLint plugin was broken. There's a fix for it but it's not released
yet:
testing-library/eslint-plugin-testing-library#1048

## Checklist

<!--- Please delete options that are not relevant. Boxes should be
checked by reviewer. -->
- [ ] Enable backports when necessary (fex. [for bug
fixes](https://github.com/camunda/camunda/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#backporting-changes)
or [for CI
changes](https://github.com/camunda/camunda/wiki/CI-&-Automation#when-to-backport-ci-changes)).

## Related issues

closes #
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants