Improve Code Coverage in src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx #3044

[Ramneet04]

Improveed the code coverage for the screen: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx

Issue: #3044: #3044

Changes Implemented:

1. Refactored the testing framework from Jest to Vitest in src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx.
2. Improved the code coverage for the screen: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx.
3. Updated import statements, mocking methods, and assertions to align with Vitest conventions..
4. Removed any /* istanbul ignore */ or equivalent statements that bypass code coverage reporting.
5. Created 2 more test cases.

• Renamed the test file:
  VolunteerManagement.test.tsx → VolunteerManagement.spec.tsx to follow the naming convention for Vitest.

• Ran all tests successfully under the Vitest environment.
  Improve Code Coverage in src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx #3044

Other information
I have read the previous refactor PR and tried to keep things as uniform as possible.
Please suggest any other changes if required.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests

  • Updated test suite for VolunteerManagement component
  • Migrated from Jest to Vitest for mocking
  • Added new test cases to verify tab selection and state updates

• Refactor

  • Removed comment directive in VolunteerManagement component
  • Simplified code structure without changing functionality

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request involves modifications to the VolunteerManagement component and its test suite. The changes primarily focus on migrating the test file from Jest to Vitest, updating mocking techniques, and removing a comment directive in the component's implementation. The modifications maintain the existing functionality while improving the testing approach and code clarity.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.spec.tsx	Migrated from Jest to Vitest, updated mocking techniques, added new test cases for tab selection and state updates
src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx	Removed /* istanbul ignore next */ comment directive from the onClick event handler

Possibly related issues

• Refactor: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2581: Directly related to refactoring the VolunteerManagement.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest
• Improve Code Coverage in src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx #3044: Aims to improve code coverage for the VolunteerManagement.tsx file
• Refactor: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/UpcomingEvents from Jest to Vitest #2582, Refactor: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/Invitations from Jest to Vitest #2583, Refactor: src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/Groups from Jest to Vitest #2584: Similar Vitest migration efforts for other Volunteer-related components

Possibly related PRs

• Refactored src/components/AddOn/support/components/Action/Action.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2482: Refactors tests from Jest to Vitest
• Refactor: src/screens/BlockUser from Jest to Vitest  #2606: Involves Vitest test framework migration
• Migrated src/screens/CommunityProfile/* from Jest to Vitest #3115: Migrates tests from Jest to Vitest for another component
• Improve Code Coverage in src/components/UserPortal/UserNavbar/UserNavbar.tsx #3117: Improves code coverage for a user portal component

Suggested labels

refactor

Suggested reviewers

• pranshugupta54
• varshith257

Poem

🐰 A Rabbit's Ode to Vitest Migration 🧪

From Jest to Vitest, we hop and we test,
Mocking functions with vigor and zest,
Removing comments, making code clean,
Our test coverage now reigns supreme!

Hop, hop, hooray! 🎉

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b60c476 and 98d5296.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.spec.tsx (3 hunks)
• src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (7)

src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.spec.tsx (6)

16-16: Switching to vitest is a welcome migration.

Great work introducing vi from vitest to replace Jest constructs. This change aligns with the PR objective to migrate to the Vitest testing framework.

---

47-53: Verify partial mock coverage.

Mocking react-router-dom at the module level is fine for testing route params. Ensure that other hooks, context, or features from the module remain functional as intended. If you encounter issues while testing additional routing features, consider partial mocking patterns or more granular mocks.

---

61-61: Clearing mocks after all tests is a good practice.

This ensures each test suite runs with a clean slate. It helps prevent interference or state carry-over issues.

---

65-65: Check broader scenarios for user ID retrieval.

Setting the userId to null effectively tests fallback routing. Consider verifying other edge cases (like an undefined value or an expired session) if applicable.

---

134-145: Excellent addition to test UI feedback for active tabs.

This test verifies that the newly selected tab button receives the btn-success class, improving coverage of the user experience. Good job ensuring the previous tab no longer has the class.

---

146-153: Good coverage of state changes during tab switching.

This test asserts the proper rendering of tab-specific elements. It's straightforward and further solidifies the reliability of tab handling.

src/screens/UserPortal/Volunteer/VolunteerManagement.tsx (1)

154-154: Removal of /* istanbul ignore next */ ensures full coverage checks.

Dropping coverage bypass directives helps maintain transparency and accuracy in test reporting. Great move to ensure no lines are unintentionally ignored.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ 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. (Beta)
• @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.

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.

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
   1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
   1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
   2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
   3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

[Ramneet04]

Ah I got stuck in one of the test cases took my whole day solving that error but it was a minor change ya but never mind. That was the only reason it took a lots of time to create the pull request.

[Ramneet04]

@coderabbitai full review

[coderabbitai]

✅ Actions performed

Full review triggered.

[Ramneet04]

What happened, though My all test cases passed still???

[palisadoes]

@coderabbitai full review

[coderabbitai]

✅ Actions performed

Full review triggered.

[palisadoes]

@coderabbitai full review

[coderabbitai]

✅ Actions performed

Full review triggered.