Refactor : Vitest to src/components/MemberDetail/*

[shivasankaran18]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Added Vitest to src/components/MemberDetail/*

Issue Number: 2978

Fixes #2798

Did you add tests for your changes?
Yes

Snapshots/Videos:

If relevant, did you update the documentation?

Summary

Migrated the testing framework to Vitest.
Updated all test files and configurations to be compatible with Vitest's syntax and features.

Have you read the contributing guide?

Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Transitioned testing framework from Jest to Vitest for EventsAttendedCardItem and EventsAttendedMemberModal components.
  • Updated mock declarations and clear mock functions accordingly.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request focuses on migrating test files in the src/components/MemberDetail directory from Jest to Vitest. Specifically, the changes involve updating EventsAttendedCardItem.spec.tsx and EventsAttendedMemberModal.spec.tsx to use Vitest's mocking and testing utilities. The modifications include replacing Jest-specific functions with their Vitest equivalents, such as changing jest.mock to vi.mock and jest.clearAllMocks() to vi.clearAllMocks().

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/components/MemberDetail/EventsAttendedCardItem.spec.tsx	Replaced Jest mocking with Vitest, added import { vi } from 'vitest'
src/components/MemberDetail/EventsAttendedMemberModal.spec.tsx	Updated mocking framework from Jest to Vitest, modified mock declarations and function calls

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Replace Jest-specific functions with Vitest equivalents [#2798]	✅
Rename test files from .test.* to .spec.* [#2798]	✅
Ensure tests pass using npm run test:vitest [#2798]	❓	Requires actual test run verification
Maintain 100% test coverage [#2798]	❓	Requires coverage report verification

Possibly related issues

• Refactor: src/screens/MemberDetail from Jest to Vitest #2556: Refactoring MemberDetail tests from Jest to Vitest, which aligns with this PR's objectives

Possibly related PRs

• refactor:vitest to src/screens/MemberDetail #2662: Migration of MemberDetail.spec.tsx to Vitest

Suggested reviewers

• palisadoes

Poem

🐰 Hopping through code with glee,
Jest transforms to Vitest, can't you see?
Mocks and tests now dance anew,
With vi replacing the old crew!
Testing rabbit's happy dance! 🧪

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0cede94 and 8c71b2e.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/components/MemberDetail/EventsAttendedCardItem.spec.tsx (2 hunks)
• src/components/MemberDetail/EventsAttendedMemberModal.spec.tsx (3 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Learnings (1)

src/components/MemberDetail/EventsAttendedMemberModal.spec.tsx (1)

Learnt from: bitbard3
PR: PalisadoesFoundation/talawa-admin#2588
File: src/components/ChangeLanguageDropdown/ChangeLanguageDropdown.spec.tsx:145-155
Timestamp: 2024-12-02T04:20:11.745Z
Learning: In PRs focused solely on refactoring test cases from Jest to Vitest, avoid suggesting optimizations or changes outside the migration scope.

🔇 Additional comments (9)

src/components/MemberDetail/EventsAttendedCardItem.spec.tsx (2)

5-5: Good job importing vi from Vitest.
This change correctly replaces any Jest references with Vitest's mocking library.

---

37-37: vi.clearAllMocks() usage is appropriate.
This ensures a clean test environment between test runs, matching Jest’s clearAllMocks() behavior.

src/components/MemberDetail/EventsAttendedMemberModal.spec.tsx (7)

6-6: Swapping to Vitest import is correct.
The import statement from vitest sets up the correct testing environment for the file.

---

8-11: Documentation block for react-i18next mock.
This updated block uses Vitest’s mocking approach (vi.mock). It is aligned with the refactoring objective.

---

12-12: Use of vi.mock aligns with Vitest.
This refactor from jest.mock to vi.mock is consistent with the new framework.

---

19-23: Mocking CustomTableCell with Vitest.
Replacing the Jest mock approach with vi.mock maintains the same functionality under Vitest.

---

45-45: vi.fn() usage is correct.
This is a direct replacement for jest.fn(), ensuring consistent test mocking.

---

50-50: vi.clearAllMocks() usage is appropriate here.
Ensures no residual state persists between tests, aligning with the migration to Vitest.

---

107-107: Refactoring mockSetShow to vi.fn() is complete.
This is the correct Vitest equivalent for the previous jest.fn() usage.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
   1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
   1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
   2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
   3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.36%. Comparing base (0cede94) to head (8c71b2e).
Report is 4 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #2945       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage             46.06%   88.36%   +42.30%     
=====================================================
  Files                   299      316       +17     
  Lines                  7420     8271      +851     
  Branches               1623     1868      +245     
=====================================================
+ Hits                   3418     7309     +3891     
+ Misses                 3767      747     -3020     
+ Partials                235      215       -20     

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