Take a look at-Driving HTML Templates

Take a look at-Driving HTML Templates
Take a look at-Driving HTML Templates

After a decade or extra the place Single-Web page-Purposes generated by
JavaScript frameworks have
become the norm
, we see that server-side rendered HTML is changing into
well-liked once more, additionally because of libraries akin to HTMX or Turbo. Writing a wealthy net UI in a
historically server-side language like Go or Java is not simply doable,
however a really engaging proposition.

We then face the issue of how you can write automated assessments for the HTML
elements of our net functions. Whereas the JavaScript world has advanced powerful and sophisticated methods to check the UI,
ranging in measurement from unit-level to integration to end-to-end, in different
languages we would not have such a richness of instruments accessible.

When writing an online software in Go or Java, HTML is usually generated
via templates, which comprise small fragments of logic. It’s actually
doable to check them not directly via end-to-end assessments, however these assessments
are gradual and costly.

We will as an alternative write unit assessments that use CSS selectors to probe the
presence and proper content material of particular HTML components inside a doc.
Parameterizing these assessments makes it simple so as to add new assessments and to obviously
point out what particulars every check is verifying. This strategy works with any
language that has entry to an HTML parsing library that helps CSS
selectors; examples are supplied in Go and Java.

Degree 1: checking for sound HTML

The primary factor we need to verify is that the HTML we produce is
principally sound. I do not imply to verify that HTML is legitimate in keeping with the
W3C; it will be cool to do it, but it surely’s higher to start out with a lot easier and quicker checks.
For example, we wish our assessments to
break if the template generates one thing like

<div>foo</p>

Let’s examine how you can do it in phases: we begin with the next check that
tries to compile the template. In Go we use the usual html/template bundle.

Go

  func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) cite

In Java, we use jmustache
as a result of it is quite simple to make use of; Freemarker or
Velocity are different widespread decisions.

Java

  @Take a look at
  void indexIsSoundHtml() i

If we run this check, it would fail, as a result of the index.tmpl file does
not exist. So we create it, with the above damaged HTML. Now the check ought to cross.

Then we create a mannequin for the template to make use of. The applying manages a todo-list, and
we will create a minimal mannequin for demonstration functions.

Go

  func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) span

Java

  @Take a look at
  void indexIsSoundHtml() span

Now we render the template, saving the ends in a bytes buffer (Go) or as a String (Java).

Go

  func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) i

Java

  @Take a look at
  void indexIsSoundHtml() tt)b.*?>", "") // inline components
             .replaceAll("<[^>]*>", " ");  // block components
     // exchange HTML character entities
     html = html.replaceAll("&nbsp;", " ")
             .replaceAll("&lt;", "<") // should be after stripping HTML tags, to keep away from creating unintended components
             .replaceAll("&gt;", ">")
             .replaceAll("&quot;", """)
             .replaceAll("&apos;", "'")
             .replaceAll("&amp;", "&"); // should be final, to keep away from creating unintended character entities
     return normalizeWhitespace(html);
  

At this level, we need to parse the HTML and we anticipate to see an
error, as a result of in our damaged HTML there’s a div component that
is closed by a p component. There’s an HTML parser within the Go
normal library, however it’s too lenient: if we run it on our damaged HTML, we do not get an
error. Fortunately, the Go normal library additionally has an XML parser that may be
configured to parse HTML (because of this Stack Overflow answer)

Go

  func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) {
    templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl"))
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
    
    // render the template right into a buffer
    var buf bytes.Buffer
    err := templ.Execute(&buf, mannequin)
    if err != nil 
     //  customized visualization utilizing data-test-icon attribute
     html = html.replaceAll("<[^<>]+bdata-test-icon="(.*?)".*?>", " $1 ");
     // strip all HTML tags
     html = html.replaceAll("</?(a
  
    // verify that the template may be parsed as (lenient) XML
    decoder := xml.NewDecoder(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
    decoder.Strict = false
    decoder.AutoClose = xml.HTMLAutoClose
    decoder.Entity = xml.HTMLEntity
    for {
      _, err := decoder.Token()
      change err {
      case io.EOF:
        return // We're finished, it is legitimate!
      case nil:
        // do nothing
      default:
        t.Fatalf("Error parsing html: %s", err)
      }
    }
  }

source

This code configures the HTML parser to have the suitable stage of leniency
for HTML, after which parses the HTML token by token. Certainly, we see the error
message we needed:

--- FAIL: Test_wellFormedHtml (0.00s)
    index_template_test.go:61: Error parsing html: XML syntax error on line 4: surprising finish component </p>

In Java, a flexible library to make use of is jsoup:

Java

  @Take a look at
  void indexIsSoundHtml() {
      var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
              new InputStreamReader(
                      getClass().getResourceAsStream("/index.tmpl")));
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
  
      var html = template.execute(mannequin);
  
      var parser = Parser.htmlParser().setTrackErrors(10);
      Jsoup.parse(html, "", parser);
      assertThat(parser.getErrors()).isEmpty();
  }

source

And we see it fail:

java.lang.AssertionError: 
Anticipating empty however was:<[<1:13>: Unexpected EndTag token [</p>] when in state [InBody],

Success! Now if we copy over the contents of the TodoMVC
template
to our index.tmpl file, the check passes.

The check, nevertheless, is simply too verbose: we extract two helper capabilities, in
order to make the intention of the check clearer, and we get

Go

  func Test_wellFormedHtml(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
  
    buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin)
  
    assertWellFormedHtml(t, buf)
  }

source

Java

  @Take a look at
  void indexIsSoundHtml() {
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin);
  
      assertSoundHtml(html);
  }

source

Degree 2: testing HTML construction

What else ought to we check?

We all know that the seems of a web page can solely be examined, finally, by a
human taking a look at how it’s rendered in a browser. Nonetheless, there’s typically
logic in templates, and we wish to have the ability to check that logic.

One may be tempted to check the rendered HTML with string equality,
however this system fails in observe, as a result of templates comprise plenty of
particulars that make string equality assertions impractical. The assertions
grow to be very verbose, and when studying the assertion, it turns into tough
to grasp what it’s that we’re making an attempt to show.

What we want
is a way to say that some elements of the rendered HTML
correspond to what we anticipate, and to ignore all the main points we do not
care about.
A method to do that is by operating queries with the CSS selector language:
it’s a highly effective language that enables us to pick the
components that we care about from the entire HTML doc. As soon as we now have
chosen these components, we (1) depend that the variety of component returned
is what we anticipate, and (2) that they comprise the textual content or different content material
that we anticipate.

The UI that we’re speculated to generate seems like this:

There are a number of particulars which might be rendered dynamically:

  1. The variety of objects and their textual content content material change, clearly
  2. The model of the todo-item adjustments when it is accomplished (e.g., the
    second)
  3. The “2 objects left” textual content will change with the variety of non-completed
    objects
  4. One of many three buttons “All”, “Energetic”, “Accomplished” might be
    highlighted, relying on the present url; as an illustration if we resolve that the
    url that exhibits solely the “Energetic” objects is /energetic, then when the present url
    is /energetic, the “Energetic” button must be surrounded by a skinny pink
    rectangle
  5. The “Clear accomplished” button ought to solely be seen if any merchandise is
    accomplished

Every of this issues may be examined with the assistance of CSS selectors.

It is a snippet from the TodoMVC template (barely simplified). I
haven’t but added the dynamic bits, so what we see right here is static
content material, supplied for instance:

index.tmpl

  <part class="todoapp">
    <ul class="todo-list">
      <!-- These are right here simply to point out the construction of the record objects -->
      <!-- Listing objects ought to get the category `accomplished` when marked as accomplished -->
      <li class="accomplished">  
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" kind="checkbox" checked>
          <label>Style JavaScript</label> 
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
      <li>
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
          <label>Purchase a unicorn</label> 
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
    </ul>
    <footer class="footer">
      <!-- This must be `0 objects left` by default -->
      <span class="todo-count"><robust>0</robust> merchandise left</span> 
      <ul class="filters">
        <li>
          <a class="chosen" href="#/">All</a> 
        </li>
        <li>
          <a href="#/energetic">Energetic</a>
        </li>
        <li>
          <a href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <!-- Hidden if no accomplished objects are left ↓ -->
      <button class="clear-completed">Clear accomplished</button> 
    </footer>
  </part>  

source

By trying on the static model of the template, we will deduce which
CSS selectors can be utilized to determine the related components for the 5 dynamic
options listed above:

function CSS selector
All of the objects ul.todo-list li
Accomplished objects ul.todo-list li.accomplished
Objects left span.todo-count
Highlighted navigation hyperlink ul.filters a.chosen
Clear accomplished button button.clear-completed

We will use these selectors to focus our assessments on simply the issues we need to check.

Testing HTML content material

The primary check will search for all of the objects, and show that the info
arrange by the check is rendered appropriately.

func Test_todoItemsAreShown(t *testing.T) {
  mannequin := todo.NewList()
  mannequin.Add("Foo")
  mannequin.Add("Bar")

  buf := renderTemplate(mannequin)

  // assert there are two <li> components contained in the <ul class="todo-list"> 
  // assert the primary <li> textual content is "Foo"
  // assert the second <li> textual content is "Bar"
}

We want a approach to question the HTML doc with our CSS selector; a great
library for Go is goquery, that implements an API impressed by jQuery.
In Java, we hold utilizing the identical library we used to check for sound HTML, specifically
jsoup. Our check turns into:

Go

  func Test_todoItemsAreShown(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
    mannequin.Add("Foo")
    mannequin.Add("Bar")
  
    buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin)
  
    // parse the HTML with goquery
    doc, err := goquery.NewDocumentFromReader(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
    if err != nil {
      // if parsing fails, we cease the check right here with t.FatalF
      t.Fatalf("Error rendering template %s", err)
    }
  
    // assert there are two <li> components contained in the <ul class="todo-list">
    choice := doc.Discover("ul.todo-list li")
    assert.Equal(t, 2, choice.Size())
  
    // assert the primary <li> textual content is "Foo"
    assert.Equal(t, "Foo", textual content(choice.Nodes[0]))
  
    // assert the second <li> textual content is "Bar"
    assert.Equal(t, "Bar", textual content(choice.Nodes[1]))
  }
  
  func textual content(node *html.Node) string {
    // Just a little mess resulting from the truth that goquery has
    // a .Textual content() technique on Choice however not on html.Node
    sel := goquery.Choice{Nodes: []*html.Node{node}}
    return strings.TrimSpace(sel.Textual content())
  }

source

Java

  @Take a look at
  void todoItemsAreShown() throws IOException {
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
      mannequin.add("Foo");
      mannequin.add("Bar");
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin);
  
      // parse the HTML with jsoup
      Doc doc = Jsoup.parse(html, "");
  
      // assert there are two <li> components contained in the <ul class="todo-list">
      var choice = doc.choose("ul.todo-list li");
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(2);
  
      // assert the primary <li> textual content is "Foo"
      assertThat(choice.get(0).textual content()).isEqualTo("Foo");
  
      // assert the second <li> textual content is "Bar"
      assertThat(choice.get(1).textual content()).isEqualTo("Bar");
  }

source

If we nonetheless have not modified the template to populate the record from the
mannequin, this check will fail, as a result of the static template
todo objects have totally different textual content:

Go

  --- FAIL: Test_todoItemsAreShown (0.00s)
      index_template_test.go:44: First record merchandise: need Foo, obtained Style JavaScript
      index_template_test.go:49: Second record merchandise: need Bar, obtained Purchase a unicorn

Java

  IndexTemplateTest > todoItemsAreShown() FAILED
      org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
      Anticipating:
       <"Style JavaScript">
      to be equal to:
       <"Foo">
      however was not.

We repair it by making the template use the mannequin knowledge:

Go

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ vary .Objects }}
      <li>
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
          <label>{{ .Title }}</label>
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
    {{ finish }}
  </ul>

source

Java – jmustache

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ #allItems }}
    <li>
      <div class="view">
        <enter class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
        <label>{{ title }}</label>
        <button class="destroy"></button>
      </div>
    </li>
    {{ /allItems }}
  </ul>

source

Take a look at each content material and soundness on the similar time

Our check works, however it’s a bit verbose, particularly the Go model. If we will have extra
assessments, they are going to grow to be repetitive and tough to learn, so we make it extra concise by extracting a helper perform for parsing the html. We additionally take away the
feedback, because the code must be clear sufficient

Go

  func Test_todoItemsAreShown(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
    mannequin.Add("Foo")
    mannequin.Add("Bar")
  
    buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin)
  
    doc := parseHtml(t, buf)
    choice := doc.Discover("ul.todo-list li")
    assert.Equal(t, 2, choice.Size())
    assert.Equal(t, "Foo", textual content(choice.Nodes[0]))
    assert.Equal(t, "Bar", textual content(choice.Nodes[1]))
  }
  
  func parseHtml(t *testing.T, buf bytes.Buffer) *goquery.Doc {
    doc, err := goquery.NewDocumentFromReader(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
    if err != nil {
      // if parsing fails, we cease the check right here with t.FatalF
      t.Fatalf("Error rendering template %s", err)
    }
    return doc
  }

Java

  @Take a look at
  void todoItemsAreShown() throws IOException {
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
      mannequin.add("Foo");
      mannequin.add("Bar");
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin);
  
      var doc = parseHtml(html);
      var choice = doc.choose("ul.todo-list li");
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(2);
      assertThat(choice.get(0).textual content()).isEqualTo("Foo");
      assertThat(choice.get(1).textual content()).isEqualTo("Bar");
  }
  
  personal static Doc parseHtml(String html) {
      return Jsoup.parse(html, "");
  }

Significantly better! At the least for my part. Now that we extracted the parseHtml helper, it is
a good suggestion to verify for sound HTML within the helper:

Go

  func parseHtml(t *testing.T, buf bytes.Buffer) *goquery.Doc {
    assertWellFormedHtml(t, buf)
    doc, err := goquery.NewDocumentFromReader(bytes.NewReader(buf.Bytes()))
    if err != nil {
      // if parsing fails, we cease the check right here with t.FatalF
      t.Fatalf("Error rendering template %s", err)
    }
    return doc
  }

source

Java

  personal static Doc parseHtml(String html) {
      var parser = Parser.htmlParser().setTrackErrors(10);
      var doc = Jsoup.parse(html, "", parser);
      assertThat(parser.getErrors()).isEmpty();
      return doc;
  }

source

And with this, we will do away with the primary check that we wrote, as we are actually testing for sound HTML on a regular basis.

The second check

Now we’re in a great place for testing extra rendering logic. The
second dynamic function in our record is “Listing objects ought to get the category
accomplished when marked as accomplished”. We will write a check for this:

Go

  func Test_completedItemsGetCompletedClass(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList()
    mannequin.Add("Foo")
    mannequin.AddCompleted("Bar")
  
    buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin)
  
    doc := parseHtml(t, buf)
    choice := doc.Discover("ul.todo-list li.accomplished")
    assert.Equal(t, 1, choice.Dimension())
    assert.Equal(t, "Bar", textual content(choice.Nodes[0]))
  }

source

Java

  @Take a look at
  void completedItemsGetCompletedClass() {
      var mannequin = new TodoList();
      mannequin.add("Foo");
      mannequin.addCompleted("Bar");
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin);
  
      Doc doc = Jsoup.parse(html, "");
      var choice = doc.choose("ul.todo-list li.accomplished");
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(1);
      assertThat(choice.textual content()).isEqualTo("Bar");
  }

source

And this check may be made inexperienced by including this little bit of logic to the
template:

Go

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ vary .Objects }}
      <li class="{{ if .IsCompleted }}accomplished{{ finish }}">
        <div class="view">
          <enter class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
          <label>{{ .Title }}</label>
          <button class="destroy"></button>
        </div>
      </li>
    {{ finish }}
  </ul>

source

Java – jmustache

  <ul class="todo-list">
    {{ #allItems }}
    <li class="{{ #isCompleted }}accomplished{{ /isCompleted }}">
      <div class="view">
        <enter class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
        <label>{{ title }}</label>
        <button class="destroy"></button>
      </div>
    </li>
    {{ /allItems }}
  </ul>

source

So little by little, we will check and add the assorted dynamic options
that our template ought to have.

Make it simple so as to add new assessments

The primary of the 20 ideas from the superb talk by Russ Cox on Go
Testing
is “Make it simple so as to add new check circumstances“. Certainly, in Go there
is a bent to make most assessments parameterized, for this very cause.
However, whereas Java has
good support
for parameterized tests
with JUnit 5, they are not used as a lot.

Since our present two assessments have the identical construction, we
might issue them right into a single parameterized check.

A check case for us will include:

  • A reputation (in order that we will produce clear error messages when the check
    fails)
  • A mannequin (in our case a todo.Listing)
  • A CSS selector
  • A listing of textual content matches that we anticipate finding once we run the CSS
    selector on the rendered HTML.

So that is the info construction for our check circumstances:

Go

  var testCases = []struct {
    identify     string
    mannequin    *todo.Listing
    selector string
    matches  []string
  }{
    {
      identify: "all todo objects are proven",
      mannequin: todo.NewList().
        Add("Foo").
        Add("Bar"),
      selector: "ul.todo-list li",
      matches:  []string{"Foo", "Bar"},
    },
    {
      identify: "accomplished objects get the 'accomplished' class",
      mannequin: todo.NewList().
        Add("Foo").
        AddCompleted("Bar"),
      selector: "ul.todo-list li.accomplished",
      matches:  []string{"Bar"},
    },
  }

source

Java

  report TestCase(String identify,
                  TodoList mannequin,
                  String selector,
                  Listing<String> matches) {
      @Override
      public String toString() {
          return identify;
      }
  }
  
  public static TestCase[] indexTestCases() {
      return new TestCase[]{
              new TestCase(
                      "all todo objects are proven",
                      new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .add("Bar"),
                      "ul.todo-list li",
                      Listing.of("Foo", "Bar")),
              new TestCase(
                      "accomplished objects get the 'accomplished' class",
                      new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .addCompleted("Bar"),
                      "ul.todo-list li.accomplished",
                      Listing.of("Bar")),
      };
  }

source

And that is our parameterized check:

Go

  func Test_indexTemplate(t *testing.T) {
    for _, check := vary testCases {
      t.Run(check.identify, func(t *testing.T) {
        buf := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", check.mannequin)
  
        assertWellFormedHtml(t, buf)
        doc := parseHtml(t, buf)
        choice := doc.Discover(check.selector)
        require.Equal(t, len(check.matches), len(choice.Nodes), "surprising # of matches")
        for i, node := vary choice.Nodes {
          assert.Equal(t, check.matches[i], textual content(node))
        }
      })
    }
  }

source

Java

  @ParameterizedTest
  @MethodSource("indexTestCases")
  void testIndexTemplate(TestCase check) {
      var html = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", check.mannequin);
  
      var doc = parseHtml(html);
      var choice = doc.choose(check.selector);
      assertThat(choice).hasSize(check.matches.measurement());
      for (int i = 0; i < check.matches.measurement(); i++) {
          assertThat(choice.get(i).textual content()).isEqualTo(check.matches.get(i));
      }
  }

source

We will now run our parameterized check and see it cross:

Go

  $ go check -v
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/all_todo_items_are_shown
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/completed_items_get_the_'accomplished'_class
  --- PASS: Test_indexTemplate (0.00s)
      --- PASS: Test_indexTemplate/all_todo_items_are_shown (0.00s)
      --- PASS: Test_indexTemplate/completed_items_get_the_'accomplished'_class (0.00s)
  PASS
  okay    tdd-html-templates  0.608s

Java

  $ ./gradlew check
  
  > Job :check
  
  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [1] all todo objects are proven PASSED
  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [2] accomplished objects get the 'accomplished' class PASSED

Notice how, by giving a reputation to our check circumstances, we get very readable check output, each on the terminal and within the IDE:

Having rewritten our two previous assessments in desk kind, it is now tremendous simple so as to add
one other. That is the check for the “x objects left” textual content:

Go

  {
    identify: "objects left",
    mannequin: todo.NewList().
      Add("One").
      Add("Two").
      AddCompleted("Three"),
    selector: "span.todo-count",
    matches:  []string{"2 objects left"},
  },

source

Java

  new TestCase(
      "objects left",
      new TodoList()
              .add("One")
              .add("Two")
              .addCompleted("Three"),
      "span.todo-count",
      Listing.of("2 objects left")),

source

And the corresponding change within the html template is:

Go

  <span class="todo-count"><robust>{{len .ActiveItems}}</robust> objects left</span>

source

Java – jmustache

  <span class="todo-count"><robust>{{activeItemsCount}}</robust> objects left</span>

source

The above change within the template requires a supporting technique within the mannequin:

Go

  kind Merchandise struct {
    Title       string
    IsCompleted bool
  }
  
  kind Listing struct {
    Objects []*Merchandise
  }
  
  func (l *Listing) ActiveItems() []*Merchandise {
    var consequence []*Merchandise
    for _, merchandise := vary l.Objects {
      if !merchandise.IsCompleted {
        consequence = append(consequence, merchandise)
      }
    }
    return consequence
  }

source

Java

  public class TodoList {
      personal closing Listing<TodoItem> objects = new ArrayList<>();
      // ...
      public lengthy activeItemsCount() {
          return objects.stream().filter(TodoItem::isActive).depend();
      }
  }

source

We have invested somewhat effort in our testing infrastructure, in order that including new
check circumstances is simpler. Within the subsequent part, we’ll see that the necessities
for the subsequent check circumstances will push us to refine our check infrastructure additional.

Making the desk extra expressive, on the expense of the check code

We are going to now check the “All”, “Energetic” and “Accomplished” navigation hyperlinks at
the underside of the UI (see the picture above),
and these rely upon which url we’re visiting, which is
one thing that our template has no approach to discover out.

Presently, all we cross to our template is our mannequin, which is a todo-list.
It isn’t right so as to add the presently visited url to the mannequin, as a result of that’s
consumer navigation state, not software state.

So we have to cross extra data to the template past the mannequin. A simple means
is to cross a map, which we assemble in our
renderTemplate perform:

Go

  func renderTemplate(mannequin *todo.Listing, path string) bytes.Buffer {
    templ := template.Should(template.ParseFiles("index.tmpl"))
    var buf bytes.Buffer
    knowledge := map[string]any{
      "mannequin": mannequin,
      "path":  path,
    }
    err := templ.Execute(&buf, knowledge)
    if err != nil {
      panic(err)
    }
    return buf
  }

Java

  personal String renderTemplate(String templateName, TodoList mannequin, String path) {
      var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
              new InputStreamReader(
                      getClass().getResourceAsStream(templateName)));
      var knowledge = Map.of(
              "mannequin", mannequin,
              "path", path
      );
      return template.execute(knowledge);
  }

And correspondingly our check circumstances desk has yet one more discipline:

Go

  var testCases = []struct {
    identify     string
    mannequin    *todo.Listing
    path     string
    selector string
    matches  []string
  }{
    {
      identify: "all todo objects are proven",
      mannequin: todo.NewList().
        Add("Foo").
        Add("Bar"),
      selector: "ul.todo-list li",
      matches:  []string{"Foo", "Bar"},
    },
  // ... the opposite circumstances
    {
      identify:     "highlighted navigation hyperlink: All",
      path:     "/",
      selector: "ul.filters a.chosen",
      matches:  []string{"All"},
    },
    {
      identify:     "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Energetic",
      path:     "/energetic",
      selector: "ul.filters a.chosen",
      matches:  []string{"Energetic"},
    },
    {
      identify:     "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished",
      path:     "/accomplished",
      selector: "ul.filters a.chosen",
      matches:  []string{"Accomplished"},
    },
  }

Java

  report TestCase(String identify,
                  TodoList mannequin,
                  String path,
                  String selector,
                  Listing<String> matches) {
      @Override
      public String toString() {
          return identify;
      }
  }
  
  public static TestCase[] indexTestCases() {
      return new TestCase[]{
              new TestCase(
                      "all todo objects are proven",
                      new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .add("Bar"),
                      "/",
                      "ul.todo-list li",
                      Listing.of("Foo", "Bar")),
              // ... the earlier circumstances
              new TestCase(
                      "highlighted navigation hyperlink: All",
                      new TodoList(),
                      "/",
                      "ul.filters a.chosen",
                      Listing.of("All")),
              new TestCase(
                      "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Energetic",
                      new TodoList(),
                      "/energetic",
                      "ul.filters a.chosen",
                      Listing.of("Energetic")),
              new TestCase(
                      "highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished",
                      new TodoList(),
                      "/accomplished",
                      "ul.filters a.chosen",
                      Listing.of("Accomplished")),
      };
  }

We discover that for the three new circumstances, the mannequin is irrelevant;
whereas for the earlier circumstances, the trail is irrelevant. The Go syntax permits us
to initialize a struct with simply the fields we’re fascinated by, however Java doesn’t have
an identical function, so we’re pushed to cross further data, and this makes the check circumstances
desk more durable to grasp.

A developer would possibly have a look at the primary check case and marvel if the anticipated habits relies upon
on the trail being set to "/", and may be tempted so as to add extra circumstances with
a special path. In the identical means, when studying the
highlighted navigation hyperlink check circumstances, the developer would possibly marvel if the
anticipated habits relies on the mannequin being set to an empty todo record. In that case, one would possibly
be led so as to add irrelevant check circumstances for the highlighted hyperlink with non-empty todo-lists.

We need to optimize for the time of the builders, so it is worthwhile to keep away from including irrelevant
knowledge to our check case. In Java we would cross null for the
irrelevant fields, however there’s a greater means: we will use
the builder sample,
popularized by Joshua Bloch.
We will shortly write one for the Java TestCase report this fashion:

Java

  report TestCase(String identify,
                  TodoList mannequin,
                  String path,
                  String selector,
                  Listing<String> matches) {
      @Override
      public String toString() {
          return identify;
      }
  
      public static closing class Builder {
          String identify;
          TodoList mannequin;
          String path;
          String selector;
          Listing<String> matches;
  
          public Builder identify(String identify) {
              this.identify = identify;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder mannequin(TodoList mannequin) {
              this.mannequin = mannequin;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder path(String path) {
              this.path = path;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder selector(String selector) {
              this.selector = selector;
              return this;
          }
  
          public Builder matches(String ... matches) {
              this.matches = Arrays.asList(matches);
              return this;
          }
  
          public TestCase construct() {
              return new TestCase(identify, mannequin, path, selector, matches);
          }
      }
  }

Hand-coding builders is somewhat tedious, however doable, although there are
automated ways to write down them.
Now we will rewrite our Java check circumstances with the Builder, to
obtain larger readability:

Java

  public static TestCase[] indexTestCases() {
      return new TestCase[]{
              new TestCase.Builder()
                      .identify("all todo objects are proven")
                      .mannequin(new TodoList()
                              .add("Foo")
                              .add("Bar"))
                      .selector("ul.todo-list li")
                      .matches("Foo", "Bar")
                      .construct(),
              // ... different circumstances
              new TestCase.Builder()
                      .identify("highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished")
                      .path("/accomplished")
                      .selector("ul.filters a.chosen")
                      .matches("Accomplished")
                      .construct(),
      };
  }

So, the place are we with our assessments? At current, they fail for the improper cause: null-pointer exceptions
because of the lacking mannequin and path values.
In an effort to get our new check circumstances to fail for the suitable cause, specifically that the template does
not but have logic to spotlight the proper hyperlink, we should
present default values for mannequin and path. In Go, we will do that
within the check technique:

Go

  func Test_indexTemplate(t *testing.T) {
    for _, check := vary testCases {
      t.Run(check.identify, func(t *testing.T) {
        if check.mannequin == nil {
          check.mannequin = todo.NewList()
        }
        buf := renderTemplate(check.mannequin, check.path)
        // ... similar as earlier than 
      })
    }
  }

source

In Java, we will present default values within the builder:

Java

  public static closing class Builder {
      String identify;
      TodoList mannequin = new TodoList();
      String path = "/";
      String selector;
      Listing<String> matches;
      // ...
  }

source

With these adjustments, we see that the final two check circumstances, those for the highlighted hyperlink Energetic
and Accomplished fail, for the anticipated cause that the highlighted hyperlink doesn’t change:

Go

  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/highlighted_navigation_link:_Active
      index_template_test.go:82: 
            Error Hint:  .../tdd-templates/go/index_template_test.go:82
            Error:        Not equal: 
                          anticipated: "Energetic"
                          precise  : "All"
  === RUN   Test_indexTemplate/highlighted_navigation_link:_Completed
      index_template_test.go:82: 
            Error Hint:  .../tdd-templates/go/index_template_test.go:82
            Error:        Not equal: 
                          anticipated: "Accomplished"
                          precise  : "All"

Java

  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [5] highlighted navigation hyperlink: Energetic FAILED
      org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
      Anticipating:
       <"All">
      to be equal to:
       <"Energetic">
      however was not.
  
  IndexTemplateTest > testIndexTemplate(TestCase) > [6] highlighted navigation hyperlink: Accomplished FAILED
      org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
      Anticipating:
       <"All">
      to be equal to:
       <"Accomplished">
      however was not.

To make the assessments cross, we make these adjustments to the template:

Go

  <ul class="filters">
    <li>
      <a class="{{ if eq .path "/" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/">All</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ if eq .path "/energetic" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/energetic">Energetic</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ if eq .path "/accomplished" }}chosen{{ finish }}" href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a>
    </li>
  </ul>

source

Java – jmustache

  <ul class="filters">
    <li>
      <a class="{{ #pathRoot }}chosen{{ /pathRoot }}" href="#/">All</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ #pathActive }}chosen{{ /pathActive }}" href="#/energetic">Energetic</a>
    </li>
    <li>
      <a class="{{ #pathCompleted }}chosen{{ /pathCompleted }}" href="#/accomplished">Accomplished</a>
    </li>
  </ul>

source

For the reason that Mustache template language doesn’t permit for equality testing, we should change the
knowledge handed to the template in order that we execute the equality assessments earlier than rendering the template:

Java

  personal String renderTemplate(String templateName, TodoList mannequin, String path) {
      var template = Mustache.compiler().compile(
              new InputStreamReader(
                      getClass().getResourceAsStream(templateName)));
      var knowledge = Map.of(
              "mannequin", mannequin,
              "pathRoot", path.equals("/"),
              "pathActive", path.equals("/energetic"),
              "pathCompleted", path.equals("/accomplished")
      );
      return template.execute(knowledge);
  }

source

And with these adjustments, all of our assessments now cross.

To recap this part, we made the check code somewhat bit extra sophisticated, in order that the check
circumstances are clearer: it is a excellent tradeoff!

Degree 3: testing HTML behaviour

Within the story up to now, we examined the behaviour of the HTML
templates
, by checking the construction of the generated HTML.
That is good, however what if we needed to check the behaviour of the HTML
itself, plus any CSS and JavaScript it might use?

The behaviour of HTML by itself is normally fairly apparent, as a result of
there’s not a lot of it. The one components that may work together with the
consumer are the anchor (<a>), <kind> and
<enter> components, however the image adjustments utterly when
we add CSS, that may disguise, present, transfer round issues and plenty extra, and
with JavaScript, that may add any behaviour to a web page.

In an software that’s primarily rendered server-side, we anticipate
that almost all behaviour is applied by returning new HTML with a
round-trip to the consumer, and this may be examined adequately with the
methods we have seen up to now, however what if we needed to hurry up the
software behaviour with a library akin to HTMX? This library works via particular
attributes which might be added to components so as to add Ajax behaviour. These
attributes are in impact a DSL that we would need to
check.

How can we check the mixture of HTML, CSS and JavaScript in
a unit check?

Testing HTML, CSS and JavaScript requires one thing that is ready to
interpret and execute their behaviours; in different phrases, we want a
browser! It’s customary to make use of headless browsers in end-to-end assessments;
can we use them for unitary assessments as an alternative? I feel that is doable,
utilizing the next methods, though I need to admit I’ve but to strive
this on an actual challenge.

We are going to use the Playwright
library, that’s accessible for each Go and
Java. The assessments we
are going to write down might be slower, as a result of we must wait a number of
seconds for the headless browser to start out, however will retain among the
essential traits of unit assessments, primarily that we’re testing
simply the HTML (and any related CSS and JavaScript), in isolation from
some other server-side logic.

Persevering with with the TodoMVC
instance, the subsequent factor we would need to check is what occurs when the
consumer clicks on the checkbox of a todo merchandise. What we would wish to occur is
that:

  1. A POST name to the server is made, in order that the applying is aware of
    that the state of a todo merchandise has modified
  2. The server returns new HTML for the dynamic a part of the web page,
    specifically all the part with class “todoapp”, in order that we will present the
    new state of the applying together with the depend of remaining “energetic”
    objects (see the template above)
  3. The web page replaces the previous contents of the “todoapp” part with
    the brand new ones.

Loading the web page within the Playwright browser

We begin with a check that can simply load the preliminary HTML. The check
is somewhat concerned, so I present the entire code right here, after which I’ll
remark it little by little.

Go

  func Test_toggleTodoItem(t *testing.T) {
    // render the preliminary HTML
    mannequin := todo.NewList().
      Add("One").
      Add("Two")
    initialHtml := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin, "/")
  
    // open the browser web page with Playwright
    web page := openPage()
    defer web page.Shut()
    logActivity(web page)
  
    // stub community calls
    err := web page.Route("**", func(route playwright.Route) {
      if route.Request().URL() == "http://localhost:4567/index.html" {
        // serve the preliminary HTML
        stubResponse(route, initialHtml.String(), "textual content/html")
      } else {
        // keep away from surprising requests
        panic("surprising request: " + route.Request().URL())
      }
    })
    if err != nil {
      t.Deadly(err)
    }
  
    // load preliminary HTML within the web page
    response, err := web page.Goto("http://localhost:4567/index.html")
    if err != nil {
      t.Deadly(err)
    }
    if response.Standing() != 200 {
      t.Fatalf("surprising standing: %d", response.Standing())
    }
  }

source

Java

  public class IndexBehaviourTest {
      static Playwright playwright;
      static Browser browser;
  
      @BeforeAll
      static void launchBrowser() {
          playwright = Playwright.create();
          browser = playwright.chromium().launch();
      }
  
      @AfterAll
      static void closeBrowser() {
          playwright.shut();
      }
  
      @Take a look at
      void toggleTodoItem() {
          // Render the preliminary html
          TodoList mannequin = new TodoList()
                  .add("One")
                  .add("Two");
          String initialHtml = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin, "/");
          
          strive (Web page web page = browser.newPage()) {
              logActivity(web page);
  
              // stub community calls
              web page.route("**", route -> {
                  if (route.request().url().equals("http://localhost:4567/index.html")) {
                      // serve the preliminary HTML
                      route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
                              .setContentType("textual content/html")
                              .setBody(initialHtml));
                  } else {
                      // we do not need surprising calls
                      fail(String.format("Sudden request: %s %s", route.request().technique(), route.request().url()));
                  }
              });
          
              // load preliminary html
              web page.navigate("http://localhost:4567/index.html");
          }
      }
  }

source

In the beginning of the check, we initialize the mannequin with two todo
objects “One” and “Two”, then we render the template as earlier than:

Go

  mannequin := todo.NewList().
    Add("One").
    Add("Two")
  initialHtml := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin, "/")

Java

  TodoList mannequin = new TodoList()
          .add("One")
          .add("Two");
  String initialHtml = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin, "/");

Then we open the Playwright “web page”, which can begin a headless
browser

Go

  web page := openPage()
  defer web page.Shut()
  logActivity(web page)

Java

  strive (Web page web page = browser.newPage()) {
      logActivity(web page);

The openPage perform in Go returns a Playwright
Web page object,

Go

  func openPage() playwright.Web page {
    pw, err := playwright.Run()
    if err != nil {
      log.Fatalf("couldn't begin playwright: %v", err)
    }
    browser, err := pw.Chromium.Launch()
    if err != nil {
      log.Fatalf("couldn't launch browser: %v", err)
    }
    web page, err := browser.NewPage()
    if err != nil {
      log.Fatalf("couldn't create web page: %v", err)
    }
    return web page
  }

and the logActivity perform offers suggestions on what
the web page is doing

Go

  func logActivity(web page playwright.Web page) {
    web page.OnRequest(func(request playwright.Request) {
      log.Printf(">> %s %sn", request.Technique(), request.URL())
    })
    web page.OnResponse(func(response playwright.Response) {
      log.Printf("<< %d %sn", response.Standing(), response.URL())
    })
    web page.OnLoad(func(web page playwright.Web page) {
      log.Println("Loaded: " + web page.URL())
    })
    web page.OnConsole(func(message playwright.ConsoleMessage) {
      log.Println("!  " + message.Textual content())
    })
  }

Java

  personal void logActivity(Web page web page) {
      web page.onRequest(request -> System.out.printf(">> %s %spercentn", request.technique(), request.url()));
      web page.onResponse(response -> System.out.printf("<< %s %spercentn", response.standing(), response.url()));
      web page.onLoad(page1 -> System.out.println("Loaded: " + page1.url()));
      web page.onConsoleMessage(consoleMessage -> System.out.println("!  " + consoleMessage.textual content()));
  }

Then we stub all community exercise that the web page would possibly attempt to do

Go

  err := web page.Route("**", func(route playwright.Route) {
    if route.Request().URL() == "http://localhost:4567/index.html" {
      // serve the preliminary HTML
      stubResponse(route, initialHtml.String(), "textual content/html")
    } else {
      // keep away from surprising requests
      panic("surprising request: " + route.Request().URL())
    }
  })

Java

  // stub community calls
  web page.route("**", route -> {
      if (route.request().url().equals("http://localhost:4567/index.html")) {
          // serve the preliminary HTML
          route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
                  .setContentType("textual content/html")
                  .setBody(initialHtml));
      } else {
          // we do not need surprising calls
          fail(String.format("Sudden request: %s %s", route.request().technique(), route.request().url()));
      }
  });

and we ask the web page to load the preliminary HTML

Go

  response, err := web page.Goto("http://localhost:4567/index.html")

Java

  web page.navigate("http://localhost:4567/index.html");

With all this equipment in place, we run the check; it succeeds and
it logs the stubbed community exercise on normal output:

Go

  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  --- PASS: Test_toggleTodoItem (0.89s)

Java

  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() STANDARD_OUT
      >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
      Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  
  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() PASSED

So with this check we are actually in a position to load arbitrary HTML in a
headless browser. Within the subsequent sections we’ll see how you can simulate consumer
interplay with components of the web page, and observe the web page’s
behaviour. However first we have to resolve an issue with the shortage of
identifiers in our area mannequin.

Figuring out todo objects

Now we need to click on on the “One” checkbox. The issue we now have is
that at current, we now have no approach to determine particular person todo objects, so
we introduce an Id discipline within the todo merchandise:

Go – up to date mannequin with Id

  kind Merchandise struct {
    Id          int
    Title       string
    IsCompleted bool
  }
  
  func (l *Listing) AddWithId(id int, title string) *Listing {
    merchandise := Merchandise{
      Id:    id,
      Title: title,
    }
    l.Objects = append(l.Objects, &merchandise)
    return l
  }
  
  // Add creates a brand new todo.Merchandise with a random Id
  func (l *Listing) Add(title string) *Listing {
    merchandise := Merchandise{
      Id:    generateRandomId(),
      Title: title,
    }
    l.Objects = append(l.Objects, &merchandise)
    return l
  }
  
  func generateRandomId() int {
    return abs(rand.Int())
  }

Java – up to date mannequin with Id

  public class TodoList {
      personal closing Listing<TodoItem> objects = new ArrayList<>();
  
      public TodoList add(String title) {
          objects.add(new TodoItem(generateRandomId(), title, false));
          return this;
      }
  
      public TodoList addCompleted(String title) {
          objects.add(new TodoItem(generateRandomId(), title, true));
          return this;
      }
  
      public TodoList add(int id, String title) {
          objects.add(new TodoItem(id, title, false));
          return this;
      }
  
      personal static int generateRandomId() {
          return new Random().nextInt(0, Integer.MAX_VALUE);
      }
  }
  
  public report TodoItem(int id, String title, boolean isCompleted) {
      public boolean isActive() {
          return !isCompleted;
      }
  }

And we replace the mannequin in our check so as to add specific Ids

Go – including Id within the check knowledge

  func Test_toggleTodoItem(t *testing.T) {
    // render the preliminary HTML
    mannequin := todo.NewList().
      AddWithId(101, "One").
      AddWithId(102, "Two")
    initialHtml := renderTemplate("index.tmpl", mannequin, "/")
    // ... 
  }

Java – including Id within the check knowledge

  @Take a look at
  void toggleTodoItem() {
      // Render the preliminary html
      TodoList mannequin = new TodoList()
              .add(101, "One")
              .add(102, "Two");
      String initialHtml = renderTemplate("/index.tmpl", mannequin, "/");
  }

We are actually prepared to check consumer interplay with the web page.

Clicking on a todo merchandise

We need to simulate consumer interplay with the HTML web page. It may be
tempting to proceed to make use of CSS selectors to determine the particular
checkbox that we need to click on, however there’s a greater means: there’s a
consensus amongst front-end builders that one of the simplest ways to check
interplay with a web page is to use it
the same way that users do
. For example, you do not search for a
button via a CSS locator akin to button.purchase; as an alternative,
you search for one thing clickable with the label “Purchase”. In observe,
this implies figuring out elements of the web page via their
ARIA
roles.

To this finish, we add code to our check to search for a checkbox labelled
“One”:

Go

  func Test_toggleTodoItem(t *testing.T) {
    // ...
    // click on on the "One" checkbox
    checkbox := web page.GetByRole(*playwright.AriaRoleCheckbox, playwright.PageGetByRoleOptions{Identify: "One"})
    if err := checkbox.Click on(); err != nil {
      t.Deadly(err)
    }
  }

Java

  @Take a look at
  void toggleTodoItem() {
          // ...
          // click on on the "One" checkbox
          var checkbox = web page.getByRole(AriaRole.CHECKBOX, new Web page.GetByRoleOptions().setName("One"));
          checkbox.click on();
      }
  }

We run the check, and it fails:

Go

  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  --- FAIL: Test_toggleTodoItem (32.74s)
      index_behaviour_test.go:50: playwright: timeout: Timeout 30000ms exceeded.

Java

  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() STANDARD_OUT
      >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
      Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  
  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() FAILED
      com.microsoft.playwright.TimeoutError: Error {
        message="hyperlink the label to the checkbox correctly:

generated HTML with dangerous accessibility

  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
      <label>One</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>

We repair it through the use of the for attribute within the
template,

index.tmpl – Go

  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-{{.Id}}" class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-{{.Id}}">{{.Title}}</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>

index.tmpl – Java

  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-{{ id }}" class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-{{ id }}">{{ title }}</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>

In order that it generates correct, accessible HTML:

generated HTML with higher accessibility

  <li>
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-101" class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-101">One</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>

We run once more the check, and it passes.

On this part we noticed how testing the HTML in the identical was as customers
work together with it led us to make use of ARIA roles, which led to enhancing
accessibility of our generated HTML. Within the subsequent part, we'll see
how you can check that the clicking on a todo merchandise triggers a distant name to the
server, that ought to end in swapping part of the present HTML with
the HTML returned by the XHR name.

Spherical-trip to the server

Now we’ll prolong our check. We inform the check that if name to
POST /toggle/101 is obtained, it ought to return some
stubbed HTML.

Go

  } else if route.Request().URL() == "http://localhost:4567/toggle/101" && route.Request().Technique() == "POST" {
    // we anticipate {that a} POST /toggle/101 request is made once we click on on the "One" checkbox
    const stubbedHtml = `
      <part class="todoapp">
        <p>Stubbed html</p>
      </part>`
    stubResponse(route, stubbedHtml, "textual content/html")

Java

  } else if (route.request().url().equals("http://localhost:4567/toggle/101") && route.request().technique().equals("POST")) {
      // we anticipate {that a} POST /toggle/101 request is made once we click on on the "One" checkbox
      String stubbedHtml = """
          <part class="todoapp">
              <p>Stubbed html</p>
          </part>
          """;
      route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
              .setContentType("textual content/html")
              .setBody(stubbedHtml));

And we stub the loading of the HTMX library, which we load from a
native file:

Go

  } else if route.Request().URL() == "https://unpkg.com/[email protected]" {
    // serve the htmx library
    stubResponse(route, readFile("testdata/htmx.min.js"), "software/javascript")

Go

  } else if (route.request().url().equals("https://unpkg.com/[email protected]")) {
      // serve the htmx library
      route.fulfill(new Route.FulfillOptions()
              .setContentType("textual content/html")
              .setBody(readFile("/htmx.min.js")));

Lastly, we add the expectation that, after we click on the checkbox,
the part of the HTML that incorporates a lot of the software is
reloaded.

Go

  // click on on the "One" checkbox
  checkbox := web page.GetByRole(*playwright.AriaRoleCheckbox, playwright.PageGetByRoleOptions{Identify: "One"})
  if err := checkbox.Click on(); err != nil {
    t.Deadly(err)
  }

  // verify that the web page has been up to date
  doc := parseHtml(t, content material(t, web page))
  components := doc.Discover("physique > part.todoapp > p")
  assert.Equal(t, "Stubbed html", components.Textual content(), should(web page.Content material()))

java

  // click on on the "One" checkbox
  var checkbox = web page.getByRole(AriaRole.CHECKBOX, new Web page.GetByRoleOptions().setName("One"));
  checkbox.click on();

  // verify that the web page has been up to date
  var doc = parseHtml(web page.content material());
  var components = doc.choose("physique > part.todoapp > p");
  assertThat(components.textual content())
          .describedAs(web page.content material())
          .isEqualTo("Stubbed html");

We run the check, and it fails, as anticipated. In an effort to perceive
why precisely it fails, we add to the error message the entire HTML
doc.

Go

  assert.Equal(t, "Stubbed html", components.Textual content(), should(web page.Content material()))

Java

  assertThat(components.textual content())
          .describedAs(web page.content material())
          .isEqualTo("Stubbed html");

The error message may be very verbose, however we see that the explanation it
fails is that we do not see the stubbed HTML within the output. This implies
that the web page didn’t make the anticipated XHR name.

Go – Java is comparable

  --- FAIL: Test_toggleTodoItem (2.75s)
  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
      index_behaviour_test.go:67:
            Error Hint:  .../index_behaviour_test.go:67
            Error:        Not equal:
                          anticipated: "Stubbed html"
                          precise  : ""
                          ...
            Take a look at:         Test_toggleTodoItem
            Messages:     <!DOCTYPE html><html lang="en"><head>
                              <meta charset="utf-8">
                              <meta identify="viewport" content material="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
                              <title>Template • TodoMVC</title>
                              <script src="https://unpkg.com/[email protected]"></script>
                            <physique>
                              <part class="todoapp">
                          ...
                                    <li class="">
                                      <div class="view">
                                        <enter id="checkbox-101" class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
                                        <label for="checkbox-101">One</label>
                                        <button class="destroy"></button>
                                      </div>
                                    </li>
                          ...

We will make this check cross by altering the HTML template to make use of HTMX
to make an XHR name again to the server. First we load the HTMX
library:

index.tmpl

  <title>Template • TodoMVC</title>
  <script src="https://unpkg.com/[email protected]"></script>

Then we add the HTMX attributes to the checkboxes:

index.tmpl

  <enter
      data-hx-post="/toggle/{{.Id}}"
      data-hx-target="part.todoapp"
      id="checkbox-{{.Id}}"
      class="toggle"
      kind="checkbox">

The data-hx-post annotation will make HTMX do a POST
name to the required url. The data-hx-target tells HTMX
to repeat the HTML returned by the decision, to the component specified by the
part.todoapp CSS locator.

We run once more the check, and it nonetheless fails!

Go – Java is comparable

  --- FAIL: Test_toggleTodoItem (2.40s)
  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> GET https://unpkg.com/[email protected]
  << 200 https://unpkg.com/[email protected]
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> POST http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
      index_behaviour_test.go:67:
            Error Hint:  .../index_behaviour_test.go:67
            Error:        Not equal:
                          anticipated: "Stubbed html"
                          precise  : ""
                          ...
            Take a look at:         Test_toggleTodoItem
            Messages:     <!DOCTYPE html><html lang="en"><head>
                              <meta charset="utf-8">
                              <meta identify="viewport" content material="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
                              <title>Template • TodoMVC</title>
                              <script src="https://unpkg.com/[email protected]"></script>
                          ...
                            <physique>
                              <part class="todoapp"><part class="todoapp">
                                    <p>Stubbed html</p>
                                  </part></part>
                          ...
                          </physique></html>

The log strains present that the POST name occurred as anticipated, however
examination of the error message exhibits that the HTML construction we
anticipated will not be there: we now have a part.todoapp nested
inside one other. Because of this we’re not utilizing the HTMX annotations
appropriately, and exhibits why this sort of check may be helpful. We add the
lacking annotation

index.tmpl

  <enter
      data-hx-post="/toggle/{{.Id}}"
      data-hx-target="part.todoapp"
      data-hx-swap="outerHTML"
      id="checkbox-{{.Id}}"
      class="toggle"
      kind="checkbox">

The default behaviour of HTMX is to interchange the inside HTML of the
goal component. The data-hx-swap="outerHTML" annotation
tells HTMX to interchange the outer HTML as an alternative.

and we check once more, and this time it passes!

Go

  === RUN   Test_toggleTodoItem
  >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> GET https://unpkg.com/[email protected]
  << 200 https://unpkg.com/[email protected]
  Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
  >> POST http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  << 200 http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  --- PASS: Test_toggleTodoItem (1.39s)

Java

  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() STANDARD_OUT
      >> GET http://localhost:4567/index.html
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/index.html
      >> GET https://unpkg.com/[email protected]
      << 200 https://unpkg.com/[email protected]
      Loaded: http://localhost:4567/index.html
      >> POST http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
      << 200 http://localhost:4567/toggle/101
  
  IndexBehaviourTest > toggleTodoItem() PASSED

On this part we noticed how you can write a check for the behaviour of our
HTML that, whereas utilizing the sophisticated equipment of a headless browser,
nonetheless feels extra like a unit check than an integration check. It’s in
reality testing simply an HTML web page with any related CSS and JavaScript,
in isolation from different elements of the applying akin to controllers,
companies or repositories.

The check prices 2-3 seconds of ready time for the headless browser to return up, which is normally an excessive amount of for a unit check; nevertheless, like a unit check, it is extremely secure, as it isn’t flaky, and its failures are documented with a comparatively clear error message.

See the ultimate model of the check in Go and in Java.

Bonus stage: Stringly asserted

Esko Luontola, TDD knowledgeable and creator of the web course tdd.mooc.fi, suggested an alternative to testing HTML with CSS selectors: the concept is to rework HTML right into a human-readable canonical kind.

Let’s take for instance this snippet of generated HTML:

<ul class="todo-list">
  <li class="">
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-100" class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-100">One</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>
  <li class="">
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-200" class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-200">Two</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>
  <li class="accomplished">
    <div class="view">
      <enter id="checkbox-300" class="toggle" kind="checkbox">
      <label for="checkbox-300">Three</label>
      <button class="destroy"></button>
    </div>
  </li>
</ul>

We might visualize the above HTML by:

  1. deleting all HTML tags
  2. decreasing each sequence of whitespace characters to a single clean

to reach at:

One Two Three

This, nevertheless, removes an excessive amount of of the HTML construction to be helpful. For example, it doesn’t allow us to distinguish between energetic and accomplished objects. Some HTML component symbolize seen content material: as an illustration

<enter worth="foo" />

exhibits a textual content field with the phrase “foo” that is a vital a part of the means we understand HTML. To visualise these components, Esko suggests so as to add a data-test-icon attribute that provides some textual content for use rather than the component when visualizing it for testing. With this,

<enter worth="foo" data-test-icon="[foo]" />

the enter component is visualized as [foo], with the sq. brackets hinting that the phrase “foo” sits inside an editable textual content field. Now if we add test-icons to our HTML template,

Go — Java is comparable

  <ul class="todo-list">
      {{ vary .mannequin.AllItems }}
      <li class="{{ if .IsCompleted }}accomplished{{ finish }}">
          <div class="view">
              <enter data-hx-post="/toggle/{{ .Id }}"
                     data-hx-target="part.todoapp"
                     data-hx-swap="outerHTML"
                     id="checkbox-{{ .Id }}"
                     class="toggle"
                     kind="checkbox"
                     data-test-icon="{{ if .IsCompleted }}✅{{ else }}⬜{{ finish }}">
              <label for="checkbox-{{ .Id }}">{{ .Title }}</label>
              <button class="destroy" data-test-icon="❌️"></button>
          </div>
      </li>
      {{ finish }}
  </ul>

we will assert towards its canonical visible illustration like this:

Go

  func Test_visualize_html_example(t *testing.T) {
    mannequin := todo.NewList().
      Add("One").
      Add("Two").
      AddCompleted("Three")
  
    buf := renderTemplate("todo-list.tmpl", mannequin, "/")
  
    anticipated := `
      ⬜ One ❌️
      ⬜ Two ❌️
      ✅ Three ❌️
      `
    assert.Equal(t, normalizeWhitespace(anticipated), visualizeHtml(buf.String()))
  }

Java

  @Take a look at
  void visualize_html_example() {
      var mannequin = new TodoList()
              .add("One")
              .add("Two")
              .addCompleted("Three");
  
      var html = renderTemplate("/todo-list.tmpl", mannequin, "/");
  
      assertThat(visualizeHtml(html))
              .isEqualTo(normalizeWhitespace("""
                      ⬜ One ❌️
                      ⬜ Two ❌️
                      ✅ Three ❌️
                      """));
  }

Right here is Esko Luontola’s Java implementation of the 2 capabilities that make this doable, and my translation to Go of his code.

Go

  func visualizeHtml(html string) string tt)b.*?>", "")
    // strip all HTML tags: block components
    html = replaceAll(html, "<[^>]*>", " ")
    // exchange HTML character entities
    html = replaceAll(html, "&nbsp;", " ")
    html = replaceAll(html, "&lt;", "<")
    html = replaceAll(html, "&gt;", ">")
    html = replaceAll(html, "&quot;", """)
    html = replaceAll(html, "&apos;", "'")
    html = replaceAll(html, "&amp;", "&")
    return normalizeWhitespace(html)
  
  
  func normalizeWhitespace(s string) string {
    return strings.TrimSpace(replaceAll(s, "s+", " "))
  }
  
  func replaceAll(src, regex, repl string) string {
    re := regexp.MustCompile(regex)
    return re.ReplaceAllString(src, repl)
  }

source

Java

  public static String visualizeHtml(String html) span
  
  public static String normalizeWhitespace(String s) {
     return s.replaceAll("s+", " ").trim();
  }

source

On this part, we now have seen a way for asserting HTML content material that’s a substitute for the CSS selector-based approach utilized in the remainder of the article. Esko Luontola has reported nice success with it, and I hope readers have success with it too!

This method of asserting towards giant, sophisticated knowledge constructions akin to HTML pages by decreasing them to a canonical string model has no identify that I do know of. Martin Fowler suggested “stringly asserted”, and from his suggestion comes the identify of this part.