Reduced duplication in call-to-action exportDOM tests

[kevinansfield]

no issue

• extracted repeated exportDOM calls to a helper util so tests avoid boilerplate and more clearly separate test setup and assertions

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request refactors the test suite for the CallToActionNode by introducing a new helper function named testRender. The helper function encapsulates the creation of a CallToActionNode instance, the invocation of its exportDOM method, and the extraction of the resulting HTML from the returned DOM element. Existing tests for the exportDOM method have been updated to use testRender, thereby reducing redundancy in the test code and improving its organization. No changes have been made to the core logic or functionality of the CallToActionNode or its exportDOM method.

Possibly related PRs

• Added CallToAction Lexical Nodes #1412: Introduced the CallToActionNode class and its functionalities, including the basis for the exportDOM method that the current tests verify.
• Added initial HTML and Email rendering #1434: Added the exportDOM method to the CallToActionNode, establishing the functionality whose tests are being refactored in this PR.
• Added visibility rendering to Call to Action card #1436: Focused on refactoring test cases for the exportDOM method with enhancements in rendering, which aligns with the structural changes in the test suite.

Suggested reviewers

• ronaldlangeveld

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0cdcf24 and 03b2430.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• packages/kg-default-nodes/test/nodes/call-to-action.test.js (7 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (2)

• GitHub Check: Node 22.13.1
• GitHub Check: Node 20.11.1

🔇 Additional comments (11)

packages/kg-default-nodes/test/nodes/call-to-action.test.js (11)

189-195: Excellent refactoring to improve test structure and maintainability

The new testRender helper function effectively encapsulates the repeated setup pattern in the exportDOM tests. This is a good application of the DRY principle, extracting the common pattern of node creation, DOM export, and HTML extraction into a reusable function.

The function signature is well-designed, taking an assertion function as a parameter and providing it with all the relevant test artifacts (element, type, and html). This creates a clean separation between test setup and assertions.

---

212-222: Clean conversion to use the helper function

The test has been effectively refactored to use the new testRender helper while maintaining all the original assertions. This improves readability by focusing on the assertions without the distraction of repetitive setup code.

---

242-250: Well-structured refactoring for email tests

The test for email attributes has been successfully converted to use the helper function. This maintains test coverage while reducing boilerplate code.

---

275-283: Proper implementation for the image cropping test

The test for cropped images in minimal layout has been successfully refactored, maintaining all the original assertions in a more readable format.

---

303-305: Concise test with focused assertion

This refactored test is now more concise, focusing only on the relevant assertion for the default image size. The helper function handles all the setup, making the test intent clearer.

---

326-328: Clear image dimension testing

The test for image width and height attributes has been successfully converted to use the helper function. The assertion is now more focused and readable.

---

332-334: Simplified textValue test

The test for textValue parsing is now more concise and focused on just the relevant assertion.

---

338-340: Cleaner img tag presence test

The test for the presence of an img tag has been successfully refactored to use the helper function, resulting in more readable code.

---

346-348: Effective negative test case

The test for the absence of an img tag has been successfully converted to use the helper function, making the test more consistent with the rest of the suite.

---

357-360: Proper web visibility test

The test for web visibility has been effectively refactored to use the helper function while maintaining the original assertions on the element properties.

---

367-371: Good email visibility test conversion

The test for email visibility has been successfully converted to use the helper function. The focused assertions on tag name and dataset properties are preserved in a more readable format.

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.