Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[test] Convert SwipeableDrawer tests to testing-library #26916

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Jun 25, 2021

Conversation

eps1lon
Copy link
Member

@eps1lon eps1lon commented Jun 23, 2021

Part of #22911
Part of #13394

@eps1lon eps1lon added the test label Jun 23, 2021
>
<div>Drawer2</div>
</SwipeableDrawer>
</div>,
);

// use the same event object for both touch start events, one would propagate to the other swipe area in the browser
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Need to do some manual testing to understand what was replayed here.

  1. events are never re-used
  2. if this is about propagating then the DOM takes care of it (not dispatching multiple times). The original idea was probably replaying about hit detection

Copy link
Member Author

@eps1lon eps1lon Jun 24, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Verified in https://codesandbox.io/s/single-swipearea-lock-ksyss (monitorEvents(document.body, ['touchstart', 'touchmove', 'touchend'])) that the way the test is setup a touchstart would only be fired at the last rendered SwipeableDrawer. The SwipeAreas are stacked on top of each other and hit detection never "pierces" elements i.e. if a touch hits an element then the event is targetted at that element not at all the ones the touch pierces. Then the event bubbles up but since the SwipeAreas are siblings, only one registers the touchstart.

I also remembered that subsequent touchmove and touchend target the same element as the touchstart.

But I don't know how I could get this test to fail. I thought https://github.com/mui-org/material-ui/blob/5f882fefadbdd72e950a4940a550c1d3287dd150/packages/material-ui/src/SwipeableDrawer/SwipeableDrawer.js#L300-L303 was responsible for this behavior but removing the early return does not fail any test.

@oliviertassinari Do you know what implementation this test was ensuring or how one would test https://github.com/mui-org/material-ui/blob/5f882fefadbdd72e950a4940a550c1d3287dd150/packages/material-ui/src/SwipeableDrawer/SwipeableDrawer.js#L300-L303

Also please review the full test diff (https://github.com/mui-org/material-ui/pull/26916/files#diff-2e95d46f49f995c596826a9b8b12a84dc9de890ac9ffb65d208dd2fc23b2ccbeR508-R551) to make sure I didn't miss something.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The new test case looks correct. Regarding getting it to fail. We added more defensive logic, later on, to avoid two swipeable drawers responding to the same event. It seems that this logic is winning over the previous solutions. For instance, event.defaultMuiPrevented now only seems to make sense if there is a custom component.

claimedSwipeInstance now seems to be solved by testing the target of the event. We should be able to remove this logic.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm somewhat leaning towards keeping the implementation to be safe. Touch related interactions are hard to test automatically so it may take a while before people realize we broken something.

@mui-pr-bot
Copy link

mui-pr-bot commented Jun 23, 2021

No bundle size changes (experimental)

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 0e4b072

@eps1lon eps1lon marked this pull request as ready for review June 24, 2021 07:56
@eps1lon eps1lon merged commit 583c802 into mui:next Jun 25, 2021
@eps1lon eps1lon deleted the test/SwipeableDrawer/testing-library branch June 25, 2021 06:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants