I am a bit new to Protractor and Jasmine, and I am trying to check if a list of elements that I have fetched using getText() contains a particular element:
Consider the following elements
var productNameElements = element.all(by.css('.table-row')).getText();
elementToBeSearched = element(by.css('.table-row .table-row-child(1)')).getText();
Now since both the variables above would return a promise, therefore by doing:
expect(productNameElements).to.eventually.contain(elementToBeSearched);
would fail, and it does fail.
Therefore, I believe that converting elementToBeSearched into a string would be beneficial and would make my life easier. Please suggest a solution on how can I convert a getText() promise to a string. Thanks
Lets say that the element is ele. So the way you should resolve the promise is-
ele.getText().then(function(str){
expect(someOtherElement.getText()).toBe(str);
})
The .then resolves the promise for you. You can confirm the string by puting a console.log(str)before you compare with expect.
PS: The promise inside the expect parenthesis is automatically resolved.
What i did was mostly similar:
productNameElements = element.all(by.css('.table-row')).getText().then(function(name) {
expect(productNameElements).to.eventually.contain(name);
});
This seems to have done the trick for me as I also checked the value of 'name' using console logging
Below code works for me:
let txt = (await elementToBeSearched.then()).toString();
Related
What I am really interested in with data-loader is the per request caching. For example say my graphql query needs to call getUser("id1") 3x. I would like something to dedupe that call.
However it seems like with data-loader I need to pass in an array of keys into my batch function, and multiple requests will be batched into one api calls.
This has me making a few assumptions that i dont like:
1.) That each service I am calling has a batch api (some of the ones im dealing with do not).
2.) What if multiple calls get batched into 1 api call, and that call fails because 1 of the items was not found. Normally I could handle this by returning null for that field, and that could be a valid case. Now however my entire call may fail, if the batch API decides to throw an error since 1 item was not found.
Is there anyway to use dataloader with single-key requests.
Both assumptions are wrong because the implementation of the batch function is ultimately left up to you. As indicated in the documentation, the only requirements when writing your batch function are as follows:
A batch loading function accepts an Array of keys, and returns a Promise which resolves to an Array of values or Error instances.
So there's no need for the underlying data source to also accept an array of IDs. And there's no need for one or more failed calls to cause the whole function to throw since you can return either null or an error instance for any particular ID in the array you return. In fact, your batch function should never throw and instead should always return an array of one or more errors.
In other words, your implementation of the batch function might look something like:
async function batchFn (ids) {
const result = await Promise.all(ids.map(async (id) => {
try {
const foo = await getFooById(id)
return foo
} catch (e) {
// either return null or the error
}
}))
}
It's worth noting that it's also possible to set the maxBatchSize to 1 to effectively disable batching. However, this doesn't change the requirements for how your batch function is implemented -- it always needs to take an array of IDs and always needs to return an array of values/errors of the same length as the array of IDs.
Daniel's solution is perfectly fine and is in fact what I've used so far, after extracting it into a helper function.
But I just found another solution that does not require that much boilerplate code.
new DataLoader<string, string>(async ([key]) => [await getEntityById(key)], {batch: false});
When we set batch: false then we should always get a key-array of size one passed as argument. We can therefore simply destructure it and return a one-sized array with the data. Notice the brackets arround the return value! If you omit those, this could go horribly wrong e.g. for string values.
I'm working with socket.io. I am having trouble receiving data from the server even though I can console.log() the data (an array of objects) right before I try to emit the data back to the calling client. If I hard code info into the emit, it will display on the client but when I use the dynamically created array of objects, it doesn't go through. My gut tells me its a asyn issue but I'm using bluebird to manage that. Perhaps its an encoding issue? I tried JSON.stringify and JSON.parse, no dice.
Server
socket.on('getClassList', function(){
sCon.getClassList()
.then(function(data){
console.log(data) //data is an array full of objects
socket.emit('STC_gotDatList', data)
})
})
Hard-Coded Expected Output:
classes['moof'] = {
accessList: [888],
connectedList: [],
firstName: "sallyburnsjellyworth"
}
Client
socket.on('STC_gotDatList', function(info){
console.log(info) //prints [] or {}
})
EDIT:
I remember reading somewhere that console.log() may not be printing data at the time the data is available/populated. Could that be it even though im using Promises? At the time I'm emitting the data, it just hasn't been populated into the array? How would i troubleshoot this scenario?
EDIT2:
A step closer. In order to get anything to return, for some reason I have to return each specific object in the 'classes' array. It wont allow me to send the entire array, for the example I gave above, to get data to the client, I have to return(classes['moof']), can't return(classes) to get the entire array... Not sure why.
EDIT3: Solution: You just can't do it this way. I had to put 'moof' inside classes as a property (className) and then I was able to pass the whole classes array.
How is the 'classes' array created?
The problem might be that it is being given properties dynamically, but has not been created as an object, but rather an array.
If you plan to dynamically add properties to it (like property moof), you should create it as an object (with {}) rather than an array (with []).
Try
var classes = {};//instead of classes = []
//then fill it however you do it
classes[property] = {
accessList: [888],
connectedList: [],
firstName: "sallyburnsjellyworth"
};
Also, the credit goes to Felix, I'm just paraphrasing his answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/8865468/7573546
Using protractor and jasmine(wd) we want to check that a table on the web page contains expected values. We get fetch the table from the page using a CSS selector:
var table = element(by.css('table#forderungenTable')).all(by.tagName('tr'));
We then set our expectations:
table.then(function(forderungen){
...
forderungen[2].all(by.tagName('td')).then(function(columns){
expect(columns[1].getText()).toEqual('1');
expect(columns[5].getText()).toEqual('CHF 277.00');
});
});
Is it possible to change this code so that we don't have to pass functions to then, in the same way that using jasminewd means that we don't have to do this? See this page, which states:
Protractor uses jasminewd, which wraps around jasmine's expect so that you can write:
expect(el.getText()).toBe('Hello, World!')
Instead of:
el.getText().then(function(text) {
expect(text).toBe('Hello, World!');
});
I know that I could write my own functions in a way similar to which jasminewd does it, but I want know if there is a better way to construct such expectations using constructs already available in protractor or jasminewd.
You can actually call getText() on an ElementArrayFinder:
var texts = element(by.css('table#forderungenTable')).all(by.tagName('tr')).get(2).all(by.tagName('td'));
expect(texts).toEqual(["text1", "text2", "text3"]);
Good day!
I began writing my own basic JavaScript library for personal use and distribution a few days ago, but I am having trouble with one of the methods, specifically bind().
Within the method itself, this refers to the library, the object.
I went to Google and found function.call(), but it didn't work out the way I planned it--it just executed the function.
If you take a look at another method, each(), you'll see that it uses call() to pass values.
I also tried the following:
f.arguments[0]=this;
My console throws an error, saying it cannot read '0' of "undefined".
I would like to be able to pass this (referencing the library--NOT THE WINDOW) to use it in the event listener.
You can see it starting at line 195 of the JavaScript of this JSFiddle.
Here it is as well:
bind:function(e,f){
if(e.indexOf("on")==0){
e=e.replace("on","");
}
if(typeof f==='function'){
/*Right now, 'this' refers to the library
How can I pass the library to the upcoming eventListener?
*/
//f=f(this); doesn't work
//f.call(this); //doesn't work
//this.target refers to the HTMLElement Object itself, which we are adding the eventListener to
//the outcome I'm looking for is something like this:
/*$('h3').which(0).bind(function({
this.css("color:red");
});*/
//(which() defines which H3 element we're dealing with
//bind is to add an event listener
this.target.addEventListener(e,f,false)
}
return this;
},
Thank you so much for your help, contributors!
If, as per your comments, you don't want to use .bind(), rather than directly passing f to addEventListener() you could pass another function that in turn calls f with .call() or .apply():
if(typeof f==='function'){
var _this = this;
this.target.addEventListener(e,function(event){
f.call(_this, event);
},false)
}
Doing it this way also lets your library do any extra event admin, e.g., pre-processing on the event object to normalise properties that are different for different browsers.
So in this particular case you actually want to call JavaScript's built in bind method that all functions have.
f = f.bind(this);
f will be a new function with it's this argument set to whatever you passed into it.
Replace f=f(this); with f.apply(this);
Look at underscore code, here:
https://github.com/jashkenas/underscore/blob/master/underscore.js#L596
I have reviewed Jasmine's documentation of the toHaveBeenCalledWith matcher in order to understand whether it's possible to pass in a regular expression for an argument, if that argument is expected to be a string. Unfortunately, this is unsupported functionality. There's also an issue open on github requesting this functionality.
I've dug a bit into the codebase, and I see how it might be possible to implement this inside the existing matcher. I think it would be more appropriate to implement it as a separate matcher though, so that the abstraction is captured individually.
In the meantime, what might be a good workaround?
After doing some digging, I've discovered that Jasmine spy objects have a calls property, which in turn has a mostRecent() function. This function also has a child property args, which returns an array of call arguments.
Thus, one may use the following sequence to perform a regexp match on call arguments, when one wants to check that the string arguments match a specific regular expression:
var mySpy = jasmine.createSpy('foo');
mySpy("bar", "baz");
expect(mySpy.calls.mostRecent().args[0]).toMatch(/bar/);
expect(mySpy.calls.mostRecent().args[1]).toMatch(/baz/);
Pretty straightforward.
As of Jasmine 2.2, you can use jasmine.stringMatching:
var mySpy = jasmine.createSpy('foo');
mySpy('bar', 'baz');
expect(mySpy).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
jasmine.stringMatching(/bar/),
jasmine.stringMatching(/baz/)
);
In Jasmine 2.0 the signature changed a bit. Here it would be:
var mySpy = jasmine.createSpy('foo');
mySpy("bar", "baz");
expect(mySpy.calls.mostRecent().args[0]).toMatch(/bar/);
expect(mySpy.calls.mostRecent().args[1]).toMatch(/baz/);
And the Documentation for Jasmine 1.3 has moved.
Alternatively, if you are spying on a method on an object:
spyOn(obj, 'method');
obj.method('bar', 'baz');
expect(obj.method.argsForCall[0][0]).toMatch(/bar/);
expect(obj.method.argsForCall[0][1]).toMatch(/baz/);
Sometimes it is more readable to write it this way:
spyOn(obj, 'method').and.callFake(function(arg1, arg2) {
expect(arg1).toMatch(/bar/);
expect(arg2).toMatch(/baz/);
});
obj.method('bar', 'baz');
expect(obj.method).toHaveBeenCalled();
It give more clear visibility of method arguments (instead of using array)
As jammon mentioned, the Jasmine 2.0 signature has changed. If you are spying on the method of an object in Jasmine 2.0, Nick's solution should be changed to use something like -
spyOn(obj, 'method');
obj.method('bar', 'baz');
expect(obj.method.calls.mostRecent().args[0]).toMatch(/bar/);
expect(obj.method.calls.mostRecent().args[1]).toMatch(/baz/);