我正在使用一些代码，其中我需要测试由函数抛出的异常的类型(它是TypeError, ReferenceError等?)
我目前的测试框架是AVA，我可以测试它作为第二个参数t.throws方法，就像这里:
it('should throw Error with message \'UNKNOWN ERROR\' when no params were passed', (t) => {
const error = t.throws(() => {
throwError();
}, TypeError);
t.is(error.message, 'UNKNOWN ERROR');
});
我开始用Jest重写我的测试，但不知道如何轻松地做到这一点。这可能吗?
当前回答
您必须将期望的函数代码包装在另一个箭头函数中，否则错误将不会被捕获，断言将失败。
要测试的函数:
const testThrowingError = () => {
throw new Error();
};
测试:
describe("error function should Throw Error", () => {
expect(() =>testThrowingError()).toThrowError();
});
资源: https://jestjs.io/docs/expect#tothrowerror
其他回答
还有一种更简单的方法对错误消息进行断言。这种方法的美妙之处在于，您不需要重新构造错误对象或获得完整的错误消息。只要您的错误包含错误消息的一部分，我们就可以假设它的类型是正确的。即
const printOnlyString = (str) => {
if(typeof str !== "string"){
throw Error("I can only print strings ${typeof str) given");
}
else {
console.log(str);
}
}
expect(() => printOnlyString(123))。toThrow(/只能打印字符串/)
我最终为我们的test-utils库编写了一个方便的方法
/**
* Utility method to test for a specific error class and message in Jest
* @param {fn, expectedErrorClass, expectedErrorMessage }
* @example failTest({
fn: () => {
return new MyObject({
param: 'stuff'
})
},
expectedErrorClass: MyError,
expectedErrorMessage: 'stuff not yet implemented'
})
*/
failTest: ({ fn, expectedErrorClass, expectedErrorMessage }) => {
try {
fn()
expect(true).toBeFalsy()
} catch (err) {
let isExpectedErr = err instanceof expectedErrorClass
expect(isExpectedErr).toBeTruthy()
expect(err.message).toBe(expectedErrorMessage)
}
}
我设法把一些答案结合起来，最后得到了这样的答案:
it('should throw', async () => {
await expect(service.methodName('some@email.com', 'unknown')).rejects.toThrow(
HttpException,
);
});
一个好方法是创建自定义错误类并模拟它们。然后你可以断言任何你想要的东西。
MessedUpError.ts
type SomeCrazyErrorObject = {
[key: string]: unknown,
}
class MessedUpError extends Error {
private customErrorData: SomeCrazyErrorObject = {};
constructor(err?: string, data?: SomeCrazyErrorObject) {
super(err || 'You messed up');
Object.entries(data ?? {}).forEach(([Key, value]) => {
this.customErrorData[Key] = value;
});
Error.captureStackTrace(this, this.constructor);
}
logMe() {
console.log(this.customErrorData);
}
}
export default MessedUpError;
messedUpError.test.ts
import MessedUpError from './MessedUpError';
jest.mock('./MessedUpError', () => jest.fn().mockImplementation((...args: any[]) => ({
constructor: args,
log: () => {},
})));
type MessedUpErrorContructorParams = Expand<typeof MessedUpError['prototype']>
const MessedUpErrorMock = MessedUpError as unknown as jest.Mock<MessedUpError, [MessedUpErrorContructorParams]>;
const serverErrorContructorCall = (i = 0) => ({
message: MessedUpErrorMock.mock.calls[i][0],
...MessedUpErrorMock.mock.calls[i][1] || {},
});
beforeEach(() => {
MessedUpErrorMock.mockClear();
});
test('Should throw', async () => {
try {
await someFunctionThatShouldThrowMessedUpError();
} catch {} finally {
expect(MessedUpErrorMock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
const constructorParams = serverErrorContructorCall();
expect(constructorParams).toHaveProperty('message', 'You messed up');
expect(constructorParams).toHaveProperty('customErrorProperty', 'someValue');
}
});
断言总是在finally子句中。通过这种方式，它将始终被断言。即使测试没有抛出任何错误。
我用了一个稍微简洁一点的版本:
expect(() => {
// Code block that should throw error
}).toThrow(TypeError) // Or .toThrow('expectedErrorMessage')
