►
Description
In this session we try to "leave the code better than we found it" by rewriting an old Vue spec to use VTU and follow testing best practices.
Part 2: https://youtu.be/mjyBU2dD3a0
MR: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/91603
A
B
A
I
think
like
like
coming
from
most
paradigms
that
is
kind
of
what
you
would
what
unit
testing
would
be
like,
but
when
you
think
of
view
components,
methods
and
states
are
kind
of
like
they
should
have
like
a
private
keyword
in
front
of
them.
So
we
don't
test
private
methods
and
you
don't
want
anything
to
call
the
method
very
rarely
do
we
want
to
do
that,
and
there
are
some
exceptions
that
we
do
allow,
which
are
like
the
open
here
and
the
modal
and
things
like
that.
A
A
Oh,
this
is
testing
if
we
actually
create
from
a
template.
Yes,
yes,
yes,
so,
let's,
let's
add
a
to-do.
This
is
the
context
that
we
want
to
make
sure
when
using
one
of
the
template
buttons
when
we're
doing
create
from
template
button.
Oh-
and
we
want
to
add
one-
the
other
one
was
good
too
right.
We
want
to
keep
that
I've
kind
of
cheated.
A
B
A
B
A
C
B
This
I'm
just
gonna
double
check.
What
because
we
did
get
a
few
hints
as
well,
so
I'm
just
gonna
say:
if
there's
anything,
okay,
so
we're
saying
store,
we
can
expect
store
dispatch
to
being
called,
is
a
good
way
to
check
that
like
when
the
file
doesn't
already
exist,
that
it
does
actually
do
what
it's
supposed
to
do
when
the
folder
doesn't
already
exist
when
the
file
that
you're
renaming,
etc
yeah
yeah,
I
so
is
that
kind
of
it
to
do
when
doesn't
exist.
A
C
A
B
B
A
C
C
B
C
B
C
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
B
A
And
can
we
move
those
lets
that
declare
our
shared
variables
would
be
at
the
top
we
can
indeed,
and
then
I
do
think
we
will
want
to
let's
initialize
the
store
at
the
very
top,
because
that's
if
we
need
to
change
the
state
or
whatever
we
can
do
that
and
then
in
our
context
easily.
So
that
way
we
don't
have
to
do.
A
And
then
one
one
small
thing
and
you'll
see
this
and
some
of
the
other
example
code
we
have
here
when
we
want
to
create
a
spy
for
a
function
what's
happening
in
line.
18
is
a
little
inferior
to
using
spy
just
spy
on,
because
if
dispatch
doesn't
exist,
it's
we're
just
gonna
overwrite
it
and
just
create
a
we're.
Just
gonna
override
it,
no
matter
what
right
a
way
to
call
the
internal
method.
A
If
we
ever
want
to
do
that,
we
use
just
fine
it'll
blow
up
if
the
method
doesn't
already
exist,
which
is
a
good
thing
and
we
can
have
it
call
the
inner
methods
and
behave
normally
as
we'd
want
or
have
a
lot
more
control
over
it.
So,
instead
of
on
line
18,
where
we
do
dispatch
equals
just
fn,
let's
get
rid
of
that
whole
line
and
let's
do
just
dot
spy
on
store,
comma
quote:
dispatch.
A
A
B
A
A
What's
not
great
is
clearly,
we
will
have
to
interact
with
the
internals
for
us
to
use
this
component
yeah,
but
rather
than
us
peppering
that
all
throughout
the
test.
Let's
put
that
in
a
helper
function
with
a
to
do
basically
saying
this
is
how
this
component
expects
to
be
opened.
We
can
adjust.
Let's
address
this
and
another
thing.
So
that's
interesting.
I
was
not
expecting
that
yeah.
I
wasn't
expecting
it.
D
I
am
out
of
curiosity
about
the
code
on
the
left,
and
this
is
this
is
not
to
blame
anybody,
but
just
to
understand
just
to
understand
the
context.
Is
there
something
that
kind
of
you
evolve
to
making
this
a
bad
idea,
or
is
this
just
trying
to
force
a
paradigm
which
the
framework
does
not
really
support
into
it,
with
the
with
the
public
method
method
or
just
like
yeah,
using
rather
private
method
as
a
public
api.
C
Are
you
asking
is
the
is
the
views
intention
that
methods
on
a
component
are
private
explicitly
and
they
just
happen
to
be
available.
Well,
I
don't
know,
I
think,
there's
there's
certainly
a
paradigm
where
it's
useful,
so,
for
instance,
you
can
have
some
root
component
that
provides
its
own
instance
to
descendants
and
that's
useful
for
where
you've
got
to
have
quite
deep
connection
between
some
root
component
and
its
descendants.
C
C
A
B
A
B
A
C
B
C
B
A
C
A
A
A
A
B
Big
question
I'm
sure,
but
could
we
would
it
make
any?
I
I
don't
know
how
many
things
we've
got
to
do,
but
I
think
this
might
have
been
what
mark
was
saying
a
moment
ago
that
we
could
pass
it
like
find
out
what
things
we
actually
need
to.
How
many
variables
are
there
in
the
state
that
we
actually
need
to
work
with?
B
A
B
B
A
A
A
A
But
at
the
time
we
create
it,
we
might
need
to
adjust
the
store
first
and
that's.
What
I
think
mark
is
saying
is
we
could
have
that
in
a
function
or
not
or
we
could
just
manually
do
the
store.
So
we
do.
We
don't
want
to
do
this
in
the
top
level
before
each
I.
I
am
actually
pretty
certain
of
that.
I
was
thinking
we
could,
but
no,
let's
not
do
that.
Let's
keep
it
like
this.
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
C
A
B
C
B
C
B
B
B
Maybe
I'll
hop
off
because
my
team
might
be
needing
me
anyway
and
then
we'll
see
how
we're
doing
in
an
hour
or
so
cool
sounds
good
or
yannick.
If
anyone
knows
the
answer
to
this
one,
then
you
could
help
me
quickly,
but
I
would
probably
just
google
it
and
I
imagine
I'll,
find
the
answer
quite
quickly.