Skip to content

#55-Add Tests To Search Filter With Input - #15

Open
vhanich wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
test/55/search-filter-input-component
Open

#55-Add Tests To Search Filter With Input #15
vhanich wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
test/55/search-filter-input-component

Conversation

@vhanich

@vhanich vhanich commented Dec 21, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tests:

  • it should render component with input in it
  • it should render typed text correctly
  • it should delete typed text when delete button is clicked
  • it should call updateFilter function on search button click
  • it should call updateFilter function when enter is pressed
image

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Expanded test coverage for the search filter input component to verify rendering, user interactions, and callback functionality.

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Dec 21, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Walkthrough

A new unit test suite is added for the SearchFilterInput component, covering rendering, user input, clearing functionality, button clicks, and keyboard interactions using Vitest and React Testing Library.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
SearchFilterInput Component Tests
src/tests/unit/components/search-filter-input/SearchFilterInput.spec.tsx
New test suite with five test cases covering component rendering, text input, clearing via button, search button invocation, and Enter key handling. Includes mock setup for react-i18n and callback assertions.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes

  • Verify test coverage adequately exercises all component scenarios
  • Confirm mock setup for react-i18n is correct and consistent
  • Validate assertions on callback invocations with expected arguments
  • Review test organization and naming conventions align with project standards

Suggested reviewers

  • diealex
  • OlhenShu
  • ViktorSvertoka

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly identifies the main change: adding unit tests for the SearchFilterInput component, which matches the actual changeset containing test cases for this component.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch test/55/search-filter-input-component

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/tests/unit/components/search-filter-input/SearchFilterInput.spec.tsx (3)

50-50: Remove extra blank line.

Minor formatting: unnecessary blank line after the test's closing brace.


12-73: Consider adding edge case coverage.

The current tests cover the main user flows well. For more comprehensive coverage, consider adding tests for:

  • Searching/submitting with empty input
  • Clearing an already-empty input
  • Different textFieldProps configurations

This would help catch potential edge-case bugs and improve test robustness.


31-72: Use userEvent.setup() for v14+ tests.

The tests call userEvent methods directly. In @testing-library/user-event v14+, the recommended approach is using the methods on instances returned by userEvent.setup(). While direct method calls are still supported in v14 to ease migration from v13, the setup pattern provides better test isolation and is the officially recommended approach.

Update all four tests to call const user = userEvent.setup() at the start and use user.type(), user.click(), and user.keyboard() instead of the direct userEvent methods.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: Repository UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 085b0fa and 0aad8b3.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/tests/unit/components/search-filter-input/SearchFilterInput.spec.tsx (1 hunks)

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
import { render, screen } from '@testing-library/react'
import {userEvent} from '@testing-library/user-event'

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue | 🔴 Critical

Fix incorrect import syntax for userEvent.

The import uses destructuring syntax, but userEvent is a default export, not a named export. This will cause a runtime error when the tests execute.

🔎 Proposed fix
-import {userEvent} from '@testing-library/user-event'
+import userEvent from '@testing-library/user-event'
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
import {userEvent} from '@testing-library/user-event'
import userEvent from '@testing-library/user-event'
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In src/tests/unit/components/search-filter-input/SearchFilterInput.spec.tsx
around line 2, the test imports userEvent using destructuring (import
{userEvent} from '@testing-library/user-event') but userEvent is a default
export; change the import to use the default import (import userEvent from
'@testing-library/user-event') so the test uses the correct module export and
avoids runtime errors.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

(SP: 1) Write tests for search filter input component

2 participants