Cypress assert is a word inside an array - cypress

I need your help. I am trying to assert the existence of a word in an array with cypress. There is an array with the names of music categories, and I should assert the result's title is included in that category. but after running I am getting this cypress error: "assert expected [ Array(1) ] to include Pop Music". I really can not find out what is the problem here. Thank you in advance
const allMusicTypes = []
cy.get('.musicCategories')
.find(selectors.CategoryList + '> a')
.invoke('text')
.then((text) => allMusicTypes.push(text.trim()))
.then(() => {
cy.get(selectors.results)
.find('button')
.click()
cy.get('.infobox')
.find('dd')
.first()
.invoke('text')
.then((categoryType) => {
const resultMusicType = categoryType.split(',')[0]
expect(allMusicTypes).to.include(resultMusicType.trim())
})

Because .find(selectors.CategoryList + '> a') finds multiple elements, .invoke('text') returns all the text from all elements in one long string.
To get an array from it, get the text of individual elements
const allMusicTypes = []
cy.get('.musicCategories')
.find(selectors.CategoryList + '> a')
.each($el => allMusicTypes.push($el.text().trim()))
.then(() => {
... // test the category type
expect(allMusicTypes).to.include(resultMusicType.trim()) // array includes
})
Or treat allMusicTypes as a string rather than an array
cy.get('.musicCategories')
.find(selectors.CategoryList + '> a')
.invoke('text')
.then((text) => text.trim())
.then((allMusicTypes) => {
... // test the category type
expect(allMusicTypes).to.include(resultMusicType.trim()) // string includes
})

Related

Not able to find the string modified in subsequent filters using tap operator

I have implemented a logic in my angular component that will display the version number against the Agreement.pdf like Agreement_v1.pdf as well as set the editable flag to true to any document that is not Identification and also Agreement document that is not v1. As you can see the version number logic is applied in the first tap operator. Unfortunately I think my second tap operator does find such occurrence. Could somebody tell me why ?
var first: number = 1;
if (this.readOnly) {
this.columnsToDisplay = ['category', 'filename', 'uploadedOnDate'];
} else {
this.columnsToDisplay = ['category', 'filename', 'uploadedOnDate', 'action', 'delete'];
}
const investigationDocuments = this.caseChange$
.pipe(
map(investigationsCase => {
this.configureSendNewAgreement(investigationsCase.state.documents);
return investigationsCase.state.documents
? investigationsCase.state.documents.filter(doc => doc.isActive === true)
: [];
}),
tap(a => a.filter(d => d.type === TypeOfDocument.Agreement).sort((x, y) => +new Date(x.uploadedOnDate) - +new Date(y.uploadedOnDate)).forEach(b => b.name = 'Agreement_v' + (first++) +'.pdf')),
tap(a => a.filter(d => d.type !== TypeOfDocument.Identification && d.uploadedBy != null && d.name !== 'Agreement_v1.pdf').forEach(b => b.isEditable = true)),
);
The tap operator doesn't modify the incoming value. So anything you'd do to a within the tap is ignored.
From the docs:
Used when you want to affect outside state with a notification without altering the notification
In other words, only use tap if you want to do some debugging or a side effect that does not change the notification (incoming variable).
Try changing both tap operators to map and see if that helps.
The map allows changing the incoming variable and it emits that changed variable to the next operator in the pipeline.
I did a stackblitz to show the difference:
https://stackblitz.com/edit/angular-tap-vs-map-deborahk
Component
import { Component, VERSION } from '#angular/core';
import { of } from 'rxjs';
import { map, tap } from 'rxjs/operators';
#Component({
selector: 'my-app',
templateUrl: './app.component.html',
styleUrls: [ './app.component.css' ]
})
export class AppComponent {
name = 'Angular ' + VERSION.major;
result$ = of(SampleData).pipe(
tap(a => a.filter(d => !d.startsWith('t'))),
tap(a => a.filter(d => !d.startsWith('f')))
)
result2$ = of(SampleData).pipe(
map(a => a.filter(d => !d.startsWith('t'))),
map(a => a.filter(d => !d.startsWith('f')))
)
constructor() {
this.result$.subscribe(result => console.log('Result: ', JSON.stringify(result)))
this.result2$.subscribe(result => console.log('Result2: ', JSON.stringify(result)))
}
}
export const SampleData = [
"one",
"two",
"three",
"four",
"five"
]
Result
Result: ["one","two","three","four","five"]
Result2: ["one"]
Notice that the first statement uses tap and the result is unchanged from the original sample data array.
The second statement uses map and the filtered results are propagated through the pipeline and appear in the result.

RxJS logic which solves a filter/merge issue

This is more a logical problem then a RxJS problem, I guess, but I do not get it how to solve it.
[input 1]
From a cities stream, I will receive 1 or 2 objects (cities1 or cities2 are test fixtures).
1 object if their is only one language available, 2 objects for a city with both languages.
[input 2]
I do also have a selectedLanguage ("fr" or "nl")
[algo]
If the language of the object corresponds the selectedLanguage, I will pluck the city. This works for my RxJS when I receive 2 objects (cities2)
But since I also can receive 1 object, the filter is not the right thing to do
[question]
Should I check the cities stream FIRST if only one object exists and add another object. Or what are better RxJS/logical options?
const cities1 = [
{city: "LEUVEN", language: "nl"}
];
const cities2 = [
{city: "BRUSSEL", language: "nl"},
{city: "BRUXELLES", language: "fr"}
];
const selectedLang = "fr"
const source$ = from(cities1);
const result = source$.pipe(
mergeMap((city) => {
return of(selectedLang).pipe(
map(lang => {
return {
lang: city.language,
city: city.city,
selectedLang: lang
}
}),
filter(a => a.lang === selectedLang),
pluck('city')
)
}
)
);
result.subscribe(console.log)
If selectedLang is not an observable (i.e. you don't want this to change) then I think it would make it way easier if you keep it as a value:
const result = source$.pipe(
filter(city => city.language === selectedLang)
map(city => city.city)
);
There's nothing wrong from using external parameters, and it makes the stream easier to read.
Now, if selectedLang is an observable, and you want result to always give the city with that selectedLang, then you probably need to combine both streams, while keeping all the cities received so far:
const selectedLang$ = of(selectedLang); // This is actually a stream that can change value
const cities$ = source$.pipe(
scan((acc, city) => [...acc, city], [])
);
const result = combineLatest([selectedLang$, cities$]).pipe(
map(([selectedLang, cities]) => cities.find(city => city.language == selectedLang)),
filter(found => Boolean(found))
map(city => city.city)
)
Edit: note that this result will emit every time cities$ or selectedLang$ changes and one of the cities matches. If you don't want repeats, you can use the distinctUntilChanged() operator - Probably this could be optimised using an exhaustMap or something, but it makes it harder to read IMO.
Thanks for your repsonse. It's great value for me. Indeed I will forget about the selectedLang$ and pass it like a regular string. Problem 1 solved
I'll explain a bit more in detail my question. My observable$ cities$ in fact is a GET and will always return 1 or 2 two rows.
leuven:
[ { city: 'LEUVEN', language: 'nl', selectedLanguage: 'fr' } ]
brussel:
[
{ city: 'BRUSSEL', language: 'nl', selectedLanguage: 'fr' },
{ city: 'BRUXELLES', language: 'fr', selectedLanguage: 'fr' }
]
In case it returns two rows I will be able to filter out the right value
filter(city => city.language === selectedLang) => BRUXELLES when selectedLangue is "fr"
But in case I only receive one row, I should always return this city.
What is the best solution to this without using if statements? I've been trying to work with object destruct and scaning the array but the result is always one record.
// HTTP get
const leuven: City[] = [ {city: "LEUVEN", language: "nl"} ];
// same HTTP get
const brussel: City[] = [ {city: "BRUSSEL", language: "nl"},
{city: "BRUXELLES", language: "fr"}
];
mapp(of(brussel), "fr").subscribe(console.log);
function mapp(cities$: Observable<City[]>, selectedLanguage: string): Observable<any> {
return cities$.pipe(
map(cities => {
return cities.map(city => { return {...city, "selectedLanguage": selectedLanguage }}
)
}),
// scan((acc, value) => [...acc, { ...value, selectedLanguage} ])
)
}

Splitting long piped chains in sub-chains without loosing information about parameters passes between sub-chains

I have a long chain of operations within a pipe. Sub-parts of this chain represent some sort of high level operation. So, for instance, the code could look something like
firstObservable().pipe(
// FIRST high level operation
map(param_1_1 => doStuff_1_1(param_1_1)),
concatMap(param_1_2 => doStuff_1_2(param_1_2)),
concatMap(param_1_3 => doStuff_1_3(param_1_3)),
// SECOND high level operation
map(param_2_1 => doStuff_2_1(param_2_1)),
concatMap(param_2_2 => doStuff_2_2(param_2_2)),
concatMap(param_2_3 => doStuff_2_3(param_2_3)),
)
To improve readability of the code, I can refactor the example above as follows
firstObservable().pipe(
performFirstOperation(),
performSecondOperation(),
}
performFirstOperation() {
return pipe(
map(param_1_1 => doStuff_1_1(param_1_1)),
concatMap(param_1_2 => doStuff_1_2(param_1_2)),
concatMap(param_1_3 => doStuff_1_3(param_1_3)),
)
}
performSecondOperation() {
return pipe(
map(param_2_1 => doStuff_2_1(param_2_1)),
concatMap(param_2_2 => doStuff_2_2(param_2_2)),
concatMap(param_2_3 => doStuff_2_3(param_2_3)),
)
}
Now, the whole thing works and I personally find the code in the second version more readable. What I loose though is the information that performFirstOperation() returns a parameter, param_2_1, which is then used by performSecondOperation().
Is there any different strategy to break a long pipe chain without actually loosing the information of the parameters passed from sub-pipe to sub-pipe?
setting aside the improper usage of forkJoin here, if you want to preserve that data, you should set things up a little differently:
firstObservable().pipe(
map(param_1_1 => doStuff_1_1(param_1_1)),
swtichMap(param_1_2 => doStuff_1_2(param_1_2)),
// forkJoin(param_1_3 => doStuff_1_3(param_1_3)), this isn't an operator
concatMap(param_2_1 => {
const param_2_2 = doStuff_2_1(param_2_1); // run this sync operation inside
return doStuff_2_2(param_2_2).pipe(
concatMap(param_2_3 => doStuff_2_3(param_2_3)),
map(param_2_4 => ([param_2_1, param_2_4])) // add inner map to gather data
);
})
)
this way you've built your second pipeline inside of your higher order operator, so that you can preserve the data from the first set of operations, and gather it with an inner map once the second set of operations has concluded.
for readability concerns, you could do something like what you had:
firstObservable().pipe(
performFirstOperation(),
performSecondOperation(),
}
performFirstOperation() {
return pipe(
map(param_1_1 => doStuff_1_1(param_1_1)),
swtichMap(param_1_2 => doStuff_1_2(param_1_2)),
// forkJoin(param_1_3 => doStuff_1_3(param_1_3)), this isn't an operator
)
}
performSecondOperation() {
return pipe(
concatMap(param_2_1 => {
const param_2_2 = doStuff_2_1(param_2_1);
return doStuff_2_2(param_2_2).pipe(
concatMap(param_2_3 => doStuff_2_3(param_2_3)),
map(param_2_4 => ([param_2_1, param_2_4]))
);
})
)
}
an alternative solution would involve multiple subscribers:
const pipe1$ = firstObservable().pipe(
performFirstOperation(),
share() // don't repeat this part for all subscribers
);
const pipe2$ = pipe1$.pipe(performSecondOperation());
then you could subscribe to each pipeline independently.
I broke one complex operation into two like this:
Main Code
dataForUser$ = this.userSelectedAction$
.pipe(
// Handle the case of no selection
filter(userName => Boolean(userName)),
// Get the user given the user name
switchMap(userName =>
this.performFirstOperation(userName)
.pipe(
switchMap(user => this.performSecondOperation(user))
))
);
First Operation
// Maps the data to the desired format
performFirstOperation(userName: string): Observable<User> {
return this.http.get<User[]>(`${this.userUrl}?username=${userName}`)
.pipe(
// The query returns an array of users, we only want the first one
map(users => users[0])
);
}
Second Operation
// Merges with the other two streams
performSecondOperation(user: User) {
return forkJoin([
this.http.get<ToDo[]>(`${this.todoUrl}?userId=${user.id}`),
this.http.get<Post[]>(`${this.postUrl}?userId=${user.id}`)
])
.pipe(
// Map the data into the desired format for display
map(([todos, posts]) => ({
name: user.name,
todos: todos,
posts: posts
}) as UserData)
);
}
Notice that I used another operator (switchMap in this case), to pass the value from one operator method to another.
I have a blitz here: https://stackblitz.com/edit/angular-rxjs-passdata-deborahk

Prevent execution based on previously emitted value

If my typeahead gets an empty search result, any subsequent query with a norrowed down search query should be prevented. E.g. if the search for 'red' returns empty, a search for 'redcar' makes no sense.
I tried using pairwise() and scan() operator. Code snippet:
import { tap, switchMap, filter, pairwise, scan, map } from 'rxjs/operators';
this.searchForm.get('search').valueChanges
.pipe(
switchMap( queryString => this.backend.search(queryString))
)
.subscribe()
Update
Given a simplified scenario: There is only the term 'apple' in the backend. The user is typing the search string (the request is not aborted by the switchMap()):
'a' -------> backend call returns 'apple'
'ap' ------> backend call returns 'apple'
'app' -----> backend call returns 'apple'
'appl' ----> backend call returns 'apple'
'apple' ---> backend call returns 'apple'
'apple p' -----> backend call returns EMPTY
'apple pi' ----> backend call returns EMPTY
'apple pie' ---> backend call returns EMPTY
The backend calls for 7. and 8. are unnecessary, because 6. already returns EMPTY. Therfore any subsequent call could be omitted. In my opinion some memoization is needed.
I would like to prevent unnecessary backend calls (http). Is there any way to achieve this in rxjs?
This is an interesting use-case and one of a very few situations where mergeScan is useful.
Basically, you want to remember the previous search term and the previous remote call result and based on their combination you'll decide whether you should make another remote call or just return EMPTY.
import { of, EMPTY, Subject, forkJoin } from 'rxjs';
import { mergeScan, tap, filter, map } from 'rxjs/operators';
const source$ = new Subject();
// Returns ['apple'] only when the entire search string is contained inside the word "apple".
// 'apple'.indexOf('app') returns 0
// 'apple'.indexOf('apple ap') returns -1
const makeRemoteCall = (str: string) =>
of('apple'.indexOf(str) === 0 ? ['apple'] : []).pipe(
tap(results => console.log(`remote returns`, results)),
);
source$
.pipe(
tap(value => console.log(`searching "${value}""`)),
mergeScan(([acc, previousValue], value: string) => {
// console.log(acc, previousValue, value);
return (acc === null || acc.length > 0 || previousValue.length > value.length)
? forkJoin([makeRemoteCall(value), of(value)]) // Make remote call and remember the previous search term
: EMPTY;
}, [null, '']),
map(acc => acc[0]), // Get only the array of responses without the previous search term
filter(results => results.length > 0), // Ignore responses that didn't find any results
)
.subscribe(results => console.log('results', results));
source$.next('a');
source$.next('ap');
source$.next('app');
source$.next('appl');
source$.next('apple');
source$.next('apple ');
source$.next('apple p');
source$.next('apple pi');
source$.next('apple pie');
setTimeout(() => source$.next('app'), 3000);
setTimeout(() => source$.next('appl'), 4000);
Live demo: https://stackblitz.com/edit/rxjs-do457
Notice that after searching for "apple " there are no more remote calls. Also, after 3s when you try searching a different term "'app'" it does make a remote call again.
You can use the filter operator:
this.searchForm.get('search').valueChanges.pipe(
filter(query => query)
switchMap(query => this.backend.search(queryString))
)
You can try out this mechanism here: RxJS-Editor
Code-share did not work so you get the code here:
const { of } = Rx;
const { filter } = RxOperators;
of('foo1', 'foo2', undefined, undefined, 'foo3').pipe(
filter(value => value)
)
Sounds like you want to keep all failed searches and check whether current search would fail also if HTTP is called. I cant think of any elegant way of having this in one stream, but with two streams:
_failedStreams = new Subject();
failedStreams$ = _failedStreams.asObservable().pipe(
scan((acc, curr) => [...acc, curr], []),
startWith('')
);
this.searchForm.get('search').valueChanges
.pipe(
withLatestFrom(failedStreams$),
switchMap([queryString, failedQueries] => {
return iif(() => failedQueries.find(failed => failed.startsWith(queryString)) ?
of('Not found') :
callBackend(queryString);
)
}
)
.subscribe()
callBackend(queryString) {
this.backend.search(queryString)).pipe(
.catchError(err => if(error.status===404) {
this._failedStreams.next(queryString);
// do something with error stream, for ex:
throwError(error.status)
}
)
}
Code is not tested, but you get the idea

Using subscribe on a GroupedObservable in map

I have an array of objects like the follwing:
private questions: Question[] = [
{
title: "...",
category: "Technologie",
answer: `...`
},
{
title: "...",
category: "Technologie",
answer: `...`
},
{
title: "...",
category: "eID",
answer: `...`
}
];
And I would like to group them by categories, filter them based on a value and return the result as an array. Currently, I'm using this:
Observable
.from(this.questions)
.groupBy(q => q.category)
.map(go =>
{
let category: Category = { title: go.key, questions: [] };
go.subscribe(d => category.questions.push(d));
return category;
})
.filter(c => c.title.toLowerCase().indexOf(value.toLowerCase()) >= 0 || c.questions.filter(q => q.title.toLowerCase().indexOf(value.toLowerCase()) >= 0).length > 0)
.toArray()
This finds the question with the value in the category title but not the one with the value in the question title. I think that's because I'm using a subscribe in map, therefore, the questions are not yet available in the filter method, so I was wondering if there's a possibility to wait for the subscribe to end before going into filter. My research pointed me to flatMap but I can't get it to do what I want.
EDIT
I figured out that I can fix the issue like this:
Observable
.from(this.questions)
.filter(q => q.category.toLowerCase().indexOf(value.toLowerCase()) >= 0 || q.title.toLowerCase().indexOf(value.toLowerCase()) >= 0)
.groupBy(q => q.category)
.map(go =>
{
let category: Category = { title: go.key, questions: [] };
go.subscribe(d => category.questions.push(d));
return category;
})
.toArray()
But I'm still interested in the answer.
When you use groupBy, you get a grouped observable that can be flattened with operators like concatMap, mergeMap, switchMap etc. Within those operators, grouped observables can be transformed separately for each category, i.e. collect the questions together into an array with reduce, and then create the desired object with map.
Observable
.from(questions)
.groupBy(q => q.category)
.mergeMap(go => {
return go.reduce((acc, question) => { acc.push(question); return acc; }, [])
.map(questions => ({ title: go.key, questions }));
})
.filter(c => "...")
.toArray()

Resources