Development: Merge test classes for same service

[Strohgelaender]

Checklist

General

• I chose a title conforming to the naming conventions for pull requests.

Motivation and Context

While working on PR #9354 I noticed that the class ShortAnswerQuestionUtil has two test files at two different locations.

Description

I merged the tests into one file.

Since this is a really small PR, I also included a fix for this warning when executing the client tests:

The modules in the templates folder are now ignored.

Steps for Testing

code review

Review Progress

Code Review

• Code Review 1
• Code Review 2

Summary by CodeRabbit

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Added new test cases for the ShortAnswerQuestionUtil service, enhancing coverage for text transformation, indentation retrieval, and first word extraction.
  • Removed outdated unit tests related to text transformation and formatting.
  • Updated Jest configuration to ignore specific module paths during testing.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes involve the addition of new test cases to the ShortAnswerQuestionUtil service specification file. Three test cases have been added to validate the functionality of the transformTextPartsIntoHTML, getIndentation, and getFirstWord methods. The previous unit tests for these methods have been deleted, and the overall structure of the test suite remains unchanged. Additionally, the jest.config.js file has been updated to ignore a specific directory during module resolution.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/test/javascript/spec/component/exercises/quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts	Added new test cases for transformTextPartsIntoHTML, getIndentation, and getFirstWord methods; deleted previous unit tests for these functionalities.
jest.config.js	Updated modulePathIgnorePatterns to ignore src/main/resources/templates/ directory.

Suggested labels

ready for review, code quality

Suggested reviewers

• krusche
• JohannesWt
• magaupp

---

Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 36fb857 and d97f0ff.

Files selected for processing (1)

• jest.config.js (1 hunks)

Additional comments not posted (1)

jest.config.js (1)

128-128: LGTM: Appropriate update to ignore template files in tests

This change to modulePathIgnorePatterns is a good addition. It will prevent Jest from attempting to process files in the 'src/main/resources/templates/' directory during module resolution, which aligns with the PR objective of addressing warnings during client test execution.

Ignoring template files in test configurations is a common and recommended practice, as these files typically don't contain testable JavaScript/TypeScript code. This targeted change should help reduce noise in the test output without affecting the actual test coverage.

---

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 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 or @coderabbitai title 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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 2

Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 00f38c0 and bf124aa.

Files selected for processing (2)

• src/test/javascript/spec/component/exercises/quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts (2 hunks)
• src/test/javascript/spec/component/short-answer-quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts (0 hunks)

Files not reviewed due to no reviewable changes (1)

• src/test/javascript/spec/component/short-answer-quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts

Additional context used

Path-based instructions (1)

src/test/javascript/spec/component/exercises/quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts (1)

Pattern src/test/javascript/spec/**/*.ts: jest: true; mock: NgMocks; bad_practices: avoid_full_module_import; perf_improvements: mock_irrelevant_deps; service_testing: mock_http_for_logic; no_schema: avoid_NO_ERRORS_SCHEMA; expectation_specificity: true; solutions: {boolean: toBeTrue/False, reference: toBe, existence: toBeNull/NotNull, undefined: toBeUndefined, class_obj: toContainEntries/toEqual, spy_calls: {not_called: not.toHaveBeenCalled, once: toHaveBeenCalledOnce, with_value: toHaveBeenCalledWith|toHaveBeenCalledExactlyOnceWith}}

Additional comments not posted (1)

src/test/javascript/spec/component/exercises/quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts (1)

232-239: LGTM! Well-structured test case for getIndentation method.

The test case for getIndentation is well-implemented. It correctly uses fakeAsync and follows the recommended expectation specificity using toBe for primitive value comparisons. The test covers multiple scenarios, including different indentation levels and code blocks.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between bf124aa and 36fb857.

Files selected for processing (1)

• src/test/javascript/spec/component/exercises/quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts (2 hunks)

Additional context used

Path-based instructions (1)

src/test/javascript/spec/component/exercises/quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts (1)

Pattern src/test/javascript/spec/**/*.ts: jest: true; mock: NgMocks; bad_practices: avoid_full_module_import; perf_improvements: mock_irrelevant_deps; service_testing: mock_http_for_logic; no_schema: avoid_NO_ERRORS_SCHEMA; expectation_specificity: true; solutions: {boolean: toBeTrue/False, reference: toBe, existence: toBeNull/NotNull, undefined: toBeUndefined, class_obj: toContainEntries/toEqual, spy_calls: {not_called: not.toHaveBeenCalled, once: toHaveBeenCalledOnce, with_value: toHaveBeenCalledWith|toHaveBeenCalledExactlyOnceWith}}

Additional comments not posted (3)

src/test/javascript/spec/component/exercises/quiz/short-answer-question-util.service.spec.ts (3)

212-230: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage for transformTextPartsIntoHTML.

The test case for transformTextPartsIntoHTML is well-structured and covers multiple scenarios including plain text, indented text, and code blocks. It correctly uses fakeAsync and follows the recommended expectation specificity using toEqual for complex object comparisons. The comprehensive coverage in a single test case provides a clear overview of the method's behavior across different input types.

---

232-239: LGTM! Clear and concise test for getIndentation.

The test case for getIndentation is well-implemented. It covers multiple scenarios including different indentation levels and a code block. The test correctly uses fakeAsync and follows the recommended expectation specificity using toBe for primitive value comparisons.

---

212-248: Overall, excellent additions to the test suite.

The new test cases for transformTextPartsIntoHTML, getIndentation, and getFirstWord methods significantly improve the test coverage of the ShortAnswerQuestionUtil service. They are well-structured, follow best practices, and cover a variety of scenarios. These additions enhance the overall quality and reliability of the test suite.

[JohannesStoehr]

Looks good to me