PromucFlow_constructor/app/client/test/testCommon.ts

247 lines
6.3 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

feat: Shared Package for DSL based operations (#23894) ## Description Splitting DSL into different files when saving into git #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #23763 #### Media #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing Manual Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Hetu Nandu <hetunandu@gmail.com>
2023-06-26 06:55:55 +00:00
import type { Page } from "@appsmith/constants/ReduxActionConstants";
import { ReduxActionTypes } from "@appsmith/constants/ReduxActionConstants";
import { initEditor } from "actions/initActions";
import { setAppMode, updateCurrentPage } from "actions/pageActions";
import { APP_MODE } from "entities/App";
import { useDispatch } from "react-redux";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type { CanvasWidgetsReduxState } from "reducers/entityReducers/canvasWidgetsReducer";
import { createSelector } from "reselect";
import { getCanvasWidgetsPayload } from "@appsmith/sagas/PageSagas";
changes in evaluation for EE - split (#27144) ## Description Evaluation split changes for EE. 1. RequiresLinting function has moved to common place - on EE extra checks will be added 2. DataTreeFactory - getActionsForCurrentPage changed to getCurrentActions -- which will be modified on EE to acomodate package actions 3. same as above for getJSCollectionsForCurrentPage --> changed to getCurrentJSCollections #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > > #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-09-12 11:51:39 +00:00
import { getCanvasWidgets } from "@appsmith/selectors/entitiesSelector";
import { editorInitializer } from "utils/editor/EditorUtils";
import { extractCurrentDSL } from "utils/WidgetPropsUtils";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type { AppState } from "@appsmith/reducers";
chore: query module evaluation (#27660) > Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description There are multiple refactors and split for query module's creator flow changes which involves module input -- it's a new entity introduced as part of modules project #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) Part of https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/modules-pod-63e0d668a7fea03850c89c6f/issues/gh/appsmithorg/appsmith/27352 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-09-29 10:42:14 +00:00
import type { WidgetEntity } from "@appsmith/entities/DataTree/types";
chore: route builder refactor (#27905) ## Description This PR aims to achieve 2 things 1. Make route building independent of explicitly passing `pageId` as param when the route is generated against the current page navigation. 2. Add extensible points to extend basePath generation in EE. THIS PR DOES NOT CHANGE ROUTE GENERATION. Changes: In `app/client/src/ce/entities/URLRedirect/URLAssembly.ts` 1. Moves the logic of `generateBasePath` way to specific method called `generateBasePathForApps` and the generateBasePath is available to extend and switch between a different base path generation logic in EE. 2. Adds a new member variable called `currentPageId`. This `currentPageId` would help generating basePath without explicitly passing `pageId` to the build method. If a `pageId` is passed it would be overridden in the `resolveEntityId` logic. 3. Added `resolveEntityId` method to resolve the entity (pageId) based on the params passed and the `currentPageId`. This method also acts as an extension point for extending the logic to any other resolution logic similar to `generateBasePath` In `app/client/src/pages/AppViewer/index.tsx` and `app/client/src/pages/Editor/index.tsx` The `currentPageId` is set using the `urlBuilder.setCurrentPageId` when the component mounts or page changes and unset when the component unmounts. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #27840 #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [x] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-10-12 05:31:22 +00:00
import urlBuilder from "@appsmith/entities/URLRedirect/URLAssembly";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type { FlattenedWidgetProps } from "reducers/entityReducers/canvasWidgetsStructureReducer";
chore: Move the widget config to widget class (#26073) ## Description - Remove the config objects from widget and config maps from the widget factory. - Introduce methods in widget development API to dynamically fetch this items. - freeze the widget configuration. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26008 > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-09-06 12:15:04 +00:00
import type { DSLWidget } from "WidgetProvider/constants";
feat: Shared Package for DSL based operations (#23894) ## Description Splitting DSL into different files when saving into git #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #23763 #### Media #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing Manual Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Hetu Nandu <hetunandu@gmail.com>
2023-06-26 06:55:55 +00:00
import { nestDSL } from "@shared/dsl";
export const useMockDsl = (dsl: any, mode?: APP_MODE) => {
const dispatch = useDispatch();
dispatch(setAppMode(mode || APP_MODE.EDIT));
const mockResp: any = {
data: {
id: "page_id",
pageId: "page_id",
name: "Page1",
applicationId: "app_id",
isDefault: true,
isHidden: false,
slug: "page-1",
layouts: [
{
id: "layout_id",
dsl,
layoutOnLoadActions: [],
layoutActions: [],
},
],
userPermissions: [
"read:pages",
"manage:pages",
"create:pageActions",
"delete:pages",
],
},
};
const canvasWidgetsPayload = getCanvasWidgetsPayload(mockResp);
dispatch({
type: ReduxActionTypes.FETCH_PAGE_DSLS_SUCCESS,
payload: [
{
pageId: mockResp.data.id,
chore: Update DSL for Anvil (#27966) ## Description - If the Anvil feature flag is enabled, set the layout system type to "ANVIL" when creating an application - Refactor DSL transformers to pull the specific transformer based on the layout system type - Refactor code to move layout system specific transformers to the specific layout system type folders - Add new entry in the list of feature flags for Anvil Note: No changes are observed visually in the application, as we're defaulting to the Fixed layout system's widget flow until integrations for Anvil are complete. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #27007 Fixes #26971 #### Media #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - NA - [ ] Jest - PENDING - [ ] Cypress - NA #### Test Plan #### Issues raised during DP testing ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-10-19 15:20:17 +00:00
dsl: extractCurrentDSL({ response: mockResp }).dsl,
},
],
});
const pages: Page[] = [
{
pageName: mockResp.data.name,
pageId: mockResp.data.id,
isDefault: mockResp.data.isDefault,
isHidden: !!mockResp.data.isHidden,
slug: mockResp.data.slug,
userPermissions: [
"read:pages",
"manage:pages",
"create:pageActions",
"delete:pages",
],
},
];
dispatch({
type: ReduxActionTypes.FETCH_PAGE_LIST_SUCCESS,
payload: {
pages,
applicationId: mockResp.data.applicationId,
},
});
dispatch({
type: "UPDATE_LAYOUT",
payload: { widgets: canvasWidgetsPayload.widgets },
});
dispatch(updateCurrentPage(mockResp.data.id));
};
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
export function MockPageDSL({ children, dsl }: any) {
editorInitializer();
useMockDsl(dsl);
return children;
}
perf: Widget re-rendering refactor (#14485) * initial commit * props hoc * changes * removed ignores and withWidgetProps * added extra props to canvasStructure * widget props changes * list widget changes * reintroduced widget props hook and other refactors * remove warnings * added deepequal for childWidgets selector * fix global hotkeys and tabs widget jest test * fix main container test fix * fixed view mode width * fix form widget values * minor fix * fix skeleton * form widget validity fix * jest test fix * fixed tests: GlobalHotkeys, Tabs, CanvasSelectectionArena and fixed main container rendering * minor fix * minor comments * reverted commented code * simplified structure, selective redux state updates and other inconsistencies * fix junit test cases * stop form widget from force rendering children * fix test case * random commit to re run tests * update isFormValid prop only if it exists * detangling circular dependency * fixing cypress tests * cleaned up code * clean up man cnavas props and fix jest cases * fix rendering order of child widgets for canvas * fix dropdown reset spec * adding comments * cleaning up unwanted code * fix multiselect widget on deploy * adressing review comments * addressing minor review comment changes * destructuring modal widget child and fix test case * fix communityIssues cypress spec * rewrite isVisible logic to match previous behaviour * merging widget props with component props before checking isVisible * adressing review comments for modal widget's isVisible Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
2022-08-19 10:10:36 +00:00
const getChildWidgets = (
canvasWidgets: CanvasWidgetsReduxState,
widgetId: string,
) => {
const parentWidget = canvasWidgets[widgetId];
if (parentWidget.children) {
return parentWidget.children.map((childWidgetId) => {
fix: Improving performance of JS evaluations by splitting the data tree (#21547) ## Description This is the second phase of the split data tree. In the previous version, we collected all config paths in each entity and put them in the `__config__` property. All those config properties do get inserted into final data tree which we don't need at all. As part of this change, we will be creating another tree i.e **'configTree'** which will contain all config of each entity. unEvalTree is split into 2 trees => 1. unEvalTree 2. configTree Example: previous unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1766" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215990868-0b095421-e7b8-44bc-89aa-065b35e237d6.png"> After this change unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1758" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991045-506fb10a-645a-4aad-8e77-0f3786a86977.png"> Note- above example doesn't have '__config__' property configTree Api1 content <img width="1760" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991169-a2e03443-5d6a-4ff1-97c5-a12593e46395.png"> ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - #11351 ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
2023-03-20 11:04:02 +00:00
const childWidget = { ...canvasWidgets[childWidgetId] } as WidgetEntity;
perf: Widget re-rendering refactor (#14485) * initial commit * props hoc * changes * removed ignores and withWidgetProps * added extra props to canvasStructure * widget props changes * list widget changes * reintroduced widget props hook and other refactors * remove warnings * added deepequal for childWidgets selector * fix global hotkeys and tabs widget jest test * fix main container test fix * fixed view mode width * fix form widget values * minor fix * fix skeleton * form widget validity fix * jest test fix * fixed tests: GlobalHotkeys, Tabs, CanvasSelectectionArena and fixed main container rendering * minor fix * minor comments * reverted commented code * simplified structure, selective redux state updates and other inconsistencies * fix junit test cases * stop form widget from force rendering children * fix test case * random commit to re run tests * update isFormValid prop only if it exists * detangling circular dependency * fixing cypress tests * cleaned up code * clean up man cnavas props and fix jest cases * fix rendering order of child widgets for canvas * fix dropdown reset spec * adding comments * cleaning up unwanted code * fix multiselect widget on deploy * adressing review comments * addressing minor review comment changes * destructuring modal widget child and fix test case * fix communityIssues cypress spec * rewrite isVisible logic to match previous behaviour * merging widget props with component props before checking isVisible * adressing review comments for modal widget's isVisible Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
2022-08-19 10:10:36 +00:00
if (childWidget?.children?.length > 0) {
childWidget.children = getChildWidgets(canvasWidgets, childWidgetId);
}
return childWidget;
});
}
return [];
};
export const mockGetChildWidgets = (state: AppState, widgetId: string) => {
return getChildWidgets(state.entities.canvasWidgets, widgetId);
};
export const mockGetPagePermissions = () => {
return ["read:pages", "manage:pages", "create:pageActions", "delete:pages"];
};
perf: Widget re-rendering refactor (#14485) * initial commit * props hoc * changes * removed ignores and withWidgetProps * added extra props to canvasStructure * widget props changes * list widget changes * reintroduced widget props hook and other refactors * remove warnings * added deepequal for childWidgets selector * fix global hotkeys and tabs widget jest test * fix main container test fix * fixed view mode width * fix form widget values * minor fix * fix skeleton * form widget validity fix * jest test fix * fixed tests: GlobalHotkeys, Tabs, CanvasSelectectionArena and fixed main container rendering * minor fix * minor comments * reverted commented code * simplified structure, selective redux state updates and other inconsistencies * fix junit test cases * stop form widget from force rendering children * fix test case * random commit to re run tests * update isFormValid prop only if it exists * detangling circular dependency * fixing cypress tests * cleaned up code * clean up man cnavas props and fix jest cases * fix rendering order of child widgets for canvas * fix dropdown reset spec * adding comments * cleaning up unwanted code * fix multiselect widget on deploy * adressing review comments * addressing minor review comment changes * destructuring modal widget child and fix test case * fix communityIssues cypress spec * rewrite isVisible logic to match previous behaviour * merging widget props with component props before checking isVisible * adressing review comments for modal widget's isVisible Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
2022-08-19 10:10:36 +00:00
export const mockCreateCanvasWidget = (
canvasWidget: FlattenedWidgetProps,
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars
fix: Improving performance of JS evaluations by splitting the data tree (#21547) ## Description This is the second phase of the split data tree. In the previous version, we collected all config paths in each entity and put them in the `__config__` property. All those config properties do get inserted into final data tree which we don't need at all. As part of this change, we will be creating another tree i.e **'configTree'** which will contain all config of each entity. unEvalTree is split into 2 trees => 1. unEvalTree 2. configTree Example: previous unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1766" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215990868-0b095421-e7b8-44bc-89aa-065b35e237d6.png"> After this change unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1758" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991045-506fb10a-645a-4aad-8e77-0f3786a86977.png"> Note- above example doesn't have '__config__' property configTree Api1 content <img width="1760" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991169-a2e03443-5d6a-4ff1-97c5-a12593e46395.png"> ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - #11351 ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
2023-03-20 11:04:02 +00:00
evaluatedWidget: WidgetEntity,
perf: Widget re-rendering refactor (#14485) * initial commit * props hoc * changes * removed ignores and withWidgetProps * added extra props to canvasStructure * widget props changes * list widget changes * reintroduced widget props hook and other refactors * remove warnings * added deepequal for childWidgets selector * fix global hotkeys and tabs widget jest test * fix main container test fix * fixed view mode width * fix form widget values * minor fix * fix skeleton * form widget validity fix * jest test fix * fixed tests: GlobalHotkeys, Tabs, CanvasSelectectionArena and fixed main container rendering * minor fix * minor comments * reverted commented code * simplified structure, selective redux state updates and other inconsistencies * fix junit test cases * stop form widget from force rendering children * fix test case * random commit to re run tests * update isFormValid prop only if it exists * detangling circular dependency * fixing cypress tests * cleaned up code * clean up man cnavas props and fix jest cases * fix rendering order of child widgets for canvas * fix dropdown reset spec * adding comments * cleaning up unwanted code * fix multiselect widget on deploy * adressing review comments * addressing minor review comment changes * destructuring modal widget child and fix test case * fix communityIssues cypress spec * rewrite isVisible logic to match previous behaviour * merging widget props with component props before checking isVisible * adressing review comments for modal widget's isVisible Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
2022-08-19 10:10:36 +00:00
): any => {
return { ...canvasWidget };
};
export const mockGetWidgetEvalValues = (
state: AppState,
widgetName: string,
) => {
return Object.values(state.entities.canvasWidgets).find(
(widget) => widget.widgetName === widgetName,
fix: Improving performance of JS evaluations by splitting the data tree (#21547) ## Description This is the second phase of the split data tree. In the previous version, we collected all config paths in each entity and put them in the `__config__` property. All those config properties do get inserted into final data tree which we don't need at all. As part of this change, we will be creating another tree i.e **'configTree'** which will contain all config of each entity. unEvalTree is split into 2 trees => 1. unEvalTree 2. configTree Example: previous unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1766" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215990868-0b095421-e7b8-44bc-89aa-065b35e237d6.png"> After this change unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1758" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991045-506fb10a-645a-4aad-8e77-0f3786a86977.png"> Note- above example doesn't have '__config__' property configTree Api1 content <img width="1760" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991169-a2e03443-5d6a-4ff1-97c5-a12593e46395.png"> ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - #11351 ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
2023-03-20 11:04:02 +00:00
) as WidgetEntity;
perf: Widget re-rendering refactor (#14485) * initial commit * props hoc * changes * removed ignores and withWidgetProps * added extra props to canvasStructure * widget props changes * list widget changes * reintroduced widget props hook and other refactors * remove warnings * added deepequal for childWidgets selector * fix global hotkeys and tabs widget jest test * fix main container test fix * fixed view mode width * fix form widget values * minor fix * fix skeleton * form widget validity fix * jest test fix * fixed tests: GlobalHotkeys, Tabs, CanvasSelectectionArena and fixed main container rendering * minor fix * minor comments * reverted commented code * simplified structure, selective redux state updates and other inconsistencies * fix junit test cases * stop form widget from force rendering children * fix test case * random commit to re run tests * update isFormValid prop only if it exists * detangling circular dependency * fixing cypress tests * cleaned up code * clean up man cnavas props and fix jest cases * fix rendering order of child widgets for canvas * fix dropdown reset spec * adding comments * cleaning up unwanted code * fix multiselect widget on deploy * adressing review comments * addressing minor review comment changes * destructuring modal widget child and fix test case * fix communityIssues cypress spec * rewrite isVisible logic to match previous behaviour * merging widget props with component props before checking isVisible * adressing review comments for modal widget's isVisible Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
2022-08-19 10:10:36 +00:00
};
chore: Merge wds and anvil feature flags (#32609) [![workerB](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fworkerb.linearb.io%2Fv2%2Fbadge%2Fprivate%2FU2FsdGVkX1LNwrMHgs05enX0VDk8QxZH7uP7Ii4HE%2Fcollaboration.svg%3FcacheSeconds%3D60)](https://workerb.linearb.io/v2/badge/collaboration-page?magicLinkId=M7zehz4) ## Description Cleaning up three patterns of checks to enable wds and anvil into two. wds and anvil had to have different flags coz anvil had to play catch up with wds, now that's not the case so it does not make sense to have two flags. Old patterns - checking if the wds feature flag is enabled - checking if the anvil feature flag is enabled - checking if the layout system of the app is anvil New Pattern - checking if anvil feature flag is enabled (used only for creating an anvil app) - checking if layout system of the app is anvil Fixes #32590 _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8663918496> > Commit: e10cc2a84ed680b29c49c5b2e8175df4c18da2f8 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8663918496&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Consolidated the usage of layout system checks across the application to use a unified Anvil layout selector, enhancing consistency in layout-related conditional logic. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed outdated feature flags related to the Anvil + WDS integration, ensuring the application's feature toggling aligns with the current development strategy. - **Tests** - Updated unit tests to align with the new method of layout system determination, ensuring test environments accurately reflect production behavior. - **Chores** - Cleaned up redundant code and feature flags that are no longer in use, simplifying the codebase and reducing potential for errors. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-04-12 17:24:04 +00:00
export const mockGetIsAnvilLayout = (state: AppState) => {
return false;
};
export const syntheticTestMouseEvent = (
event: MouseEvent,
optionsToAdd = {},
) => {
const options = Object.entries(optionsToAdd);
options.forEach(([key, value]) => {
Object.defineProperty(event, key, { get: () => value });
});
return event;
};
export function MockApplication({ children }: any) {
editorInitializer();
const dispatch = useDispatch();
dispatch(initEditor({ pageId: "page_id", mode: APP_MODE.EDIT }));
const mockResp: any = {
workspaceId: "workspace_id",
pages: [
{
id: "page_id",
pageId: "page_id",
name: "Page1",
isDefault: true,
slug: "page-1",
userPermissions: [
"read:pages",
"manage:pages",
"create:pageActions",
"delete:pages",
],
},
],
id: "app_id",
isDefault: true,
name: "appName",
slug: "app-name",
applicationVersion: 2,
};
urlBuilder.updateURLParams(
{
applicationId: mockResp.id,
applicationSlug: mockResp.slug,
applicationVersion: mockResp.applicationVersion,
},
[
{
pageId: mockResp.pages[0].id,
pageSlug: mockResp.pages[0].slug,
},
],
);
dispatch({
type: ReduxActionTypes.FETCH_APPLICATION_SUCCESS,
payload: mockResp,
});
dispatch({
type: ReduxActionTypes.FETCH_PAGE_LIST_SUCCESS,
payload: {
pages: mockResp.pages,
},
});
dispatch({
type: ReduxActionTypes.SWITCH_CURRENT_PAGE_ID,
payload: {
id: "page_id",
slug: "page-1",
permissions: [
"read:pages",
"manage:pages",
"create:pageActions",
"delete:pages",
],
},
});
return children;
}
//got it from @blueprintjs/test-commons to dispatch hotkeys events
export function dispatchTestKeyboardEventWithCode(
target: EventTarget,
eventType: string,
key: string,
keyCode: number,
shift = false,
meta = false,
) {
const event = document.createEvent("KeyboardEvent");
(event as any).initKeyboardEvent(
eventType,
true,
true,
window,
key,
0,
meta,
false,
shift,
);
Object.defineProperty(event, "key", { get: () => key });
Object.defineProperty(event, "which", { get: () => keyCode });
target.dispatchEvent(event);
}