though we recommend Jest as our preference, the library works with any framework

In Jest we are currently running all tests in JSDOM and not in a browser. This implies that certain scenarios cannot be tested or behave differently than in the real application.

Move it to Jest. This potentially requires extending our jsdom mocked browser environment. Move it to RSpec. This will probably require us changing our perspective to a use-case oriented one. We just want to make sure we have the same value coverage.

Running yarn jest-debug runs Jest in debug mode, allowing you to debug/inspect

Differences to Karma

Various test runners support using compiled webpack code to drive tests, but may be difficult to integrate with webpack, and Neutrino helps alleviate this

The amount of dev time it saves is uncanny. Like, what used to take 3 hours to write now takes like 30 minutes. No joke.

In this setup, it is common to test app.js and want to either not call the actual math.js functions, or spy them to make sure they’re called as expected.

Mocking localStorage is optional, but without mocking getComputedStyle your test won’t run, as Angular checks in which browser it executes. We need to fake it.

Let’s take a couple of steps back, and ask ourselves if we want to test our library and our application at the same time? I don’t think this is what we want, right? We rather want to:test our librarybuild our library; when all the library tests are successfultest our application; when the library is built

n the head and the body, in the way of listening

As to jests. These are supposed to be of some service in controversy. Gorgias said that you should kill your opponents' earnestness with jesting and their jesting with earnestness; in which he was right. Jests have been classified in the Poetics. Some are becoming to a gentleman, others are not; see that you choose such as become you.

Gorgias said that you should kill your opponents' earnestness with jesting and their jesting with earnestness;