You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The snapshot artifact should be committed alongside code changes, and reviewed as part of your code review process. Jest uses [pretty-format](https://github.com/facebook/jest/tree/master/packages/pretty-format) to make snapshots human-readable during code review. On subsequent test runs Jest will simply compare the rendered output with the previous snapshot. If they match, the test will pass. If they don't match, either the test runner found a bug in your code (in this case, it's `<Link>` component) that should be fixed, or the implementation has changed and the snapshot needs to be updated.
43
43
44
-
> Note: The snapshot is directly scoped to the data you render – in our example it's `<Link />` component with page prop passed to it. This implies that even if any other file has missing props (Say, `App.js`) in the `<Link />` component, it will still pass the test as the test doesn't know the usage of `<Link />` component and it's scoped only to the `Link.react.js`.
45
-
> Also, Rendering the same component with different props in other snapshot tests will not affect the first one, as the tests don't know about each other.
44
+
> Note: The snapshot is directly scoped to the data you render – in our example it's `<Link />` component with page prop passed to it. This implies that even if any other file has missing props (Say, `App.js`) in the `<Link />` component, it will still pass the test as the test doesn't know the usage of `<Link />` component and it's scoped only to the `Link.react.js`. Also, Rendering the same component with different props in other snapshot tests will not affect the first one, as the tests don't know about each other.
46
45
47
46
More information on how snapshot testing works and why we built it can be found on the [release blog post](https://jestjs.io/blog/2016/07/27/jest-14.html). We recommend reading [this blog post](http://benmccormick.org/2016/09/19/testing-with-jest-snapshots-first-impressions/) to get a good sense of when you should use snapshot testing. We also recommend watching this [egghead video](https://egghead.io/lessons/javascript-use-jest-s-snapshot-testing-feature?pl=testing-javascript-with-jest-a36c4074) on Snapshot Testing with Jest.
Since we just updated our component to point to a different address, it's reasonable to expect changes in the snapshot for this component. Our snapshot test case is failing because the snapshot for our updated component no longer matches the snapshot artifact for this test case.
70
69
@@ -84,17 +83,17 @@ You can try out this functionality by cloning the [snapshot example](https://git
84
83
85
84
Failed snapshots can also be updated interactively in watch mode:
Once you enter Interactive Snapshot Mode, Jest will step you through the failed snapshots one test at a time and give you the opportunity to review the failed output.
90
89
91
90
From here you can choose to update that snapshot or skip to the next:
The snapshot artifact should be committed alongside code changes, and reviewed as part of your code review process. Jest uses [pretty-format](https://github.com/facebook/jest/tree/master/packages/pretty-format) to make snapshots human-readable during code review. On subsequent test runs Jest will simply compare the rendered output with the previous snapshot. If they match, the test will pass. If they don't match, either the test runner found a bug in your code (in this case, it's `<Link>` component) that should be fixed, or the implementation has changed and the snapshot needs to be updated.
44
44
45
-
> Note: The snapshot is directly scoped to the data you render – in our example it's `<Link />` component with page prop passed to it. This implies that even if any other file has missing props (Say, `App.js`) in the `<Link />` component, it will still pass the test as the test doesn't know the usage of `<Link />` component and it's scoped only to the `Link.react.js`.
46
-
> Also, Rendering the same component with different props in other snapshot tests will not affect the first one, as the tests don't know about each other.
45
+
> Note: The snapshot is directly scoped to the data you render – in our example it's `<Link />` component with page prop passed to it. This implies that even if any other file has missing props (Say, `App.js`) in the `<Link />` component, it will still pass the test as the test doesn't know the usage of `<Link />` component and it's scoped only to the `Link.react.js`. Also, Rendering the same component with different props in other snapshot tests will not affect the first one, as the tests don't know about each other.
47
46
48
47
More information on how snapshot testing works and why we built it can be found on the [release blog post](https://jestjs.io/blog/2016/07/27/jest-14.html). We recommend reading [this blog post](http://benmccormick.org/2016/09/19/testing-with-jest-snapshots-first-impressions/) to get a good sense of when you should use snapshot testing. We also recommend watching this [egghead video](https://egghead.io/lessons/javascript-use-jest-s-snapshot-testing-feature?pl=testing-javascript-with-jest-a36c4074) on Snapshot Testing with Jest.
Since we just updated our component to point to a different address, it's reasonable to expect changes in the snapshot for this component. Our snapshot test case is failing because the snapshot for our updated component no longer matches the snapshot artifact for this test case.
71
70
@@ -85,17 +84,17 @@ You can try out this functionality by cloning the [snapshot example](https://git
85
84
86
85
Failed snapshots can also be updated interactively in watch mode:
Once you enter Interactive Snapshot Mode, Jest will step you through the failed snapshots one test at a time and give you the opportunity to review the failed output.
91
90
92
91
From here you can choose to update that snapshot or skip to the next:
0 commit comments