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
这有点奇怪，但它是有效的，以我之见是很好的可读性:
it('should throw Error with message \'UNKNOWN ERROR\' when no parameters were passed', () => {
try {
throwError();
// Fail test if above expression doesn't throw anything.
expect(true).toBe(false);
} catch (e) {
expect(e.message).toBe("UNKNOWN ERROR");
}
});
Catch块捕获您的异常，然后您可以测试您引发的Error。奇怪的期待(真正的).toBe(假);如果没有抛出预期的错误，则需要测试失败。否则，这一行永远无法到达(Error应该在它们之前引发)。
@Kenny Body提出了一个更好的解决方案，如果你使用expect.assertions()，可以提高代码质量:
it('should throw Error with message \'UNKNOWN ERROR\' when no parameters were passed', () => {
expect.assertions(1);
try {
throwError();
} catch (e) {
expect(e.message).toBe("UNKNOWN ERROR");
}
});
请参阅原始答案和更多解释:如何在Jest中测试抛出异常的类型
2022年编辑:
要使用这种方法而不触发no-conditional-expect规则(如果你使用eslint-plugin-jest)，该规则的文档建议使用错误包装器:
class NoErrorThrownError extends Error {}
const getError = async <TError>(call: () => unknown): Promise<TError> => {
try {
await call();
throw new NoErrorThrownError();
} catch (error: unknown) {
return error as TError;
}
};
describe('when the http request fails', () => {
it('includes the status code in the error', async () => {
const error = await getError(async () => makeRequest(url));
// check that the returned error wasn't that no error was thrown
expect(error).not.toBeInstanceOf(NoErrorThrownError);
expect(error).toHaveProperty('statusCode', 404);
});
});
参见:no-conditional-expect文档
其他回答
这有点奇怪，但它是有效的，以我之见是很好的可读性:
it('should throw Error with message \'UNKNOWN ERROR\' when no parameters were passed', () => {
try {
throwError();
// Fail test if above expression doesn't throw anything.
expect(true).toBe(false);
} catch (e) {
expect(e.message).toBe("UNKNOWN ERROR");
}
});
Catch块捕获您的异常，然后您可以测试您引发的Error。奇怪的期待(真正的).toBe(假);如果没有抛出预期的错误，则需要测试失败。否则，这一行永远无法到达(Error应该在它们之前引发)。
@Kenny Body提出了一个更好的解决方案，如果你使用expect.assertions()，可以提高代码质量:
it('should throw Error with message \'UNKNOWN ERROR\' when no parameters were passed', () => {
expect.assertions(1);
try {
throwError();
} catch (e) {
expect(e.message).toBe("UNKNOWN ERROR");
}
});
请参阅原始答案和更多解释:如何在Jest中测试抛出异常的类型
2022年编辑:
要使用这种方法而不触发no-conditional-expect规则(如果你使用eslint-plugin-jest)，该规则的文档建议使用错误包装器:
class NoErrorThrownError extends Error {}
const getError = async <TError>(call: () => unknown): Promise<TError> => {
try {
await call();
throw new NoErrorThrownError();
} catch (error: unknown) {
return error as TError;
}
};
describe('when the http request fails', () => {
it('includes the status code in the error', async () => {
const error = await getError(async () => makeRequest(url));
// check that the returned error wasn't that no error was thrown
expect(error).not.toBeInstanceOf(NoErrorThrownError);
expect(error).toHaveProperty('statusCode', 404);
});
});
参见:no-conditional-expect文档
我自己没有尝试过，但我建议使用Jest的toThrow断言。所以我猜你的例子应该是这样的:
it('should throw Error with message \'UNKNOWN ERROR\' when no parameters were passed', (t) => {
const error = t.throws(() => {
throwError();
}, TypeError);
expect(t).toThrowError('UNKNOWN ERROR');
//or
expect(t).toThrowError(TypeError);
});
同样，我还没有测试它，但我认为它应该可以工作。
Modern Jest允许您对被拒绝的值进行更多检查。例如，你可以测试http异常的状态代码:
const request = Promise.reject({statusCode: 404})
await expect(request).rejects.toMatchObject({ statusCode: 500 });
会出错
Error: expect(received).rejects.toMatchObject(expected)
- Expected
+ Received
Object {
- "statusCode": 500,
+ "statusCode": 404,
}
如果你正在使用Promises:
await expect(Promise.reject(new HttpException('Error message', 402)))
.rejects.toThrowError(HttpException);
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
