Add a context usable in tests #349
Assignees
Labels
good first issue
Good for newcomers
Comments
|
@EwenQuim Mind if I take this issue? |
|
If you want it, it's yours! As usual (not fun but very helpful), don't forget tests and documentation. Happy coding! 🔥 |
|
Thanks @EwenQuim 😊 |
olisaagbafor
added a commit
to olisaagbafor/fuego
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2025
Add MockContext[B] to help users test their controllers without framework dependencies. Includes realistic examples and documentation. - Move testing docs from README.md to TESTING.md - Add mock context with getters/setters - Add example user controller tests - Use fuego_test package for end-user perspective Closes go-fuego#349
olisaagbafor
added a commit
to olisaagbafor/fuego
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2025
Replace basic getter/setter tests with a real-world example: - Add UserController with Create and GetByID endpoints - Add UserService with mock implementation - Show proper separation of concerns - Demonstrate practical testing patterns - Move testing docs from README.md to TESTING.md This provides users with a clear example of how to test their controllers using the mock context in a real-world scenario. Closes go-fuego#349
EwenQuim
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 1, 2025
* feat: add framework-agnostic mock context for testing Implements a MockContext[B] type that allows testing controllers without framework dependencies. Includes comprehensive tests and documentation. * feat(test): add framework-agnostic mock context Add MockContext[B] to help users test their controllers without framework dependencies. Includes realistic examples and documentation. - Move testing docs from README.md to TESTING.md - Add mock context with getters/setters - Add example user controller tests - Use fuego_test package for end-user perspective Closes #349 * feat(test): add realistic mock context example Replace basic getter/setter tests with a real-world example: - Add UserController with Create and GetByID endpoints - Add UserService with mock implementation - Show proper separation of concerns - Demonstrate practical testing patterns - Move testing docs from README.md to TESTING.md This provides users with a clear example of how to test their controllers using the mock context in a real-world scenario. Closes #349 * Resolved the review comments * Removed the TESTING.md file * Documentation and testing updates * Use internal.CommonContext to provide most functions in MockContext * refactor(mock): make MockContext fields public and leverage CommonContext functionality * feat(testing): Expose MockContext fields for simpler test setup Convert private fields to public and update docs with examples * fix(mock): Initialize OpenAPIParams in MockContext constructor Properly initialize CommonContext fields to prevent potential panics * Removed unused import * feat(mock): Add helper methods for setting query params with OpenAPI validation * Removed unused comment * Linting * Adds `NewMockContextNoBody` to create a new MockContext suitable for a request & controller with no body Changed WithXxx to SetXxx for query parameters. Removed the ...option pattern for declaring query parameters in the MockContext. * Removed the available fields and methods section from the testing guide It's not necessary to have the available fields and methods section in the testing guide, as it's already documented in the codebase & the godoc reference. --------- Co-authored-by: EwenQuim <ewen.quimerch@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Each framework (
net/http,gin...) have a private context struct that respects theContextWithBody[B]interface.But when testing your controller that have the
func (c ContextWithBody[B]) (T, error)signature, we need a struct that respect this interface. Currently, users have to provide their struct, like inexamples/gin-compat/main_test.go.Describe the solution you'd like
That we provide a
ContextMock[B]with aurl.Valuesand aBody Bthat the user can simply fill in its tests, like inextra/fuegogin/context_mock.gobut router-agnostic.For the user, that means that he's testing his logic and not the framework: he trusts our serialization, validation etc...
That makes users more Fuego-dependant, which is not a good thing, but it's also more convenient than to use httptest and rewrite all utils. This also feels weird if the user have controllers that they cannot directly test.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: