Rewrite one test to move away from Specta #319
Conversation
From Specta's GitHub repo: > Specta is considered a done project [...], we recommend you consider Quick.
crazytonyli
force-pushed
the
move-from-specta-to-quick
branch
from
b19dd50 to
5f6fa84
Compare
| XCTFail("Test case needs to provide a context") | ||
| return |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Side note: Once can also inline this, like return XCTFail(...).
It's probably not a good idea in this test suite because it's not a pattern it uses but I find it neat, specially under the hood. At first look it looks weird but thinking about it it's obviously okay. XCTFail returns Void so it's totally legit to "return it" because it's the same as return Void or return.
🤓
| return | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| it("should not be called if tqracker isn't registered") { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| it("should not be called if tqracker isn't registered") { | |
| it("should not be called if tracker isn't registered") { |
| void WPAnalyticsTestVerifyUnregistered(WPAnalyticsMethodBehaviorInvocation invocation) { | ||
| id trackerMock = OCMStrictClassMock([TestAnalyticsTracker class]); | ||
| id expectation = [trackerMock reject]; | ||
| invocation(expectation); | ||
| [trackerMock verify]; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| void WPAnalyticsTestVerifyRegistered(WPAnalyticsMethodBehaviorInvocation invocation) { | ||
| id trackerMock = OCMStrictClassMock([TestAnalyticsTracker class]); | ||
| id expectation = [trackerMock expect]; | ||
| invocation(expectation); | ||
| invocation(trackerMock); | ||
| [trackerMock verify]; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| void WPAnalyticsTestVerifyMultipleTrackers(WPAnalyticsMethodBehaviorInvocation invocation) { | ||
| id trackerMock = OCMStrictClassMock([TestAnalyticsTracker class]); | ||
| id trackerMock2 = OCMStrictClassMock([TestAnalyticsTracker class]); | ||
| id expectation = [trackerMock expect]; | ||
| id expectation2 = [trackerMock2 expect]; | ||
| invocation(expectation); | ||
| invocation(expectation2); | ||
| invocation(trackerMock); | ||
| invocation(trackerMock2); | ||
| [trackerMock verify]; | ||
| [trackerMock2 verify]; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the reason these have been defined in the Objective-C layer, although used only in the Swift / Quick code, that they use OCMock?
I noticed that OCMStrictClassMock is a macro and we could replace it with its definition like let trackerMock = OCMockObject.mock(for: TestAnalyticsTracker.self). But then things fall apart because OCMock relies on Objective-C's dynamism, but in Swift the type system gets in the way. I was not able to call verify() on my Swift trackerMock instance.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the reason these have been defined in the Objective-C layer, although used only in the Swift / Quick code, that they use OCMock?
Yes. I'd like to keep the original tests, but I'm not familiar with OCMock, not sure if there is a way to move all these code into a Swift file.
Mainly because Specta doesn't support SPM. Also, it's no longer in active development.
The test case
WPAnalyticsTestsis also rewritten in Swift, so that we can continue use the Swift version of Quick when adding Swift Package Manager support later.