flummox

flummox copied to clipboard

Is this possible?

@christophercliff Not sure what you are asking here, can you elaborate a bit?

var MyComponent = React.createClass()
var MyConnectedComponent = connectoToStores(MyComponent)
var myConnectedComponent = TestUtils.renderIntoDocument(React.createElement(MyConnectedComponent))

Given the above, is it possible to access, for example, refs on the myComponent instance. I ended up using TestUtils.findRenderedComponentWithType(myConnectedComponent, MyComponent), which is fine for my use case. Thought there might be a more direct approach.

The HoC does not keep a ref to the wrapped child. Because of that you cannot access your wrapped component directly.

I'm re-opening this because I think we should expose the wrapped component e.g. for testing purposes. I looked around a bit and I don't think there's an existing convention in the React community, but perhaps something as simple as MyConnectedComponent.WrappedComponent.

I might have been a bit overzealous here. For testing purposes exposing the wrapped component might be a good idea. But that means that you will have to test your component without being wrapped. If I understand the question correctly the idea is to get a reference to the rendered component instance, in order to check stuff there or to call methods on it. Then we'd need to attach a ref to the wrapped component.

@christophercliff Did I understand you correctly?

Just exposing the wrapped class is sufficient. Then as @christophercliff noted above, you can use findRenderedComponentWithType() to get a ref to an instance.

Ok so we're just talking about a shorter way for testing here.

@johanneslumpe Not just shorter — if you're using decorators, then it's actually necessary, because you don't have any reference to the inner component.

But that means that you will have to test your component without being wrapped

In most cases, that's exactly what you want. The advantage of using higher-order components is that the wrapped component doesn't care about the underlying Flux implementation — it just receives props. So in your tests, rather than creating mock Flux dependencies, you pass some props.

@acdlite oh yeah, decorators. Ok sure, it's not hard to fix this :) Also: true about not wanting to mock all the stuff - silly me.

Yeah this will be a one-liner, just need to decide on the right name for the property. InnerComponent? WrappedComponent? BaseComponent?

Actually, if you have multiple HoCs on the same base component, you need to loop through them. I like this approach:

https://github.com/vslinko/hoc/blob/master/index.js#L18-L23

I think WrappedComponent makes the most sense, as it perfectly describes what happened to the original Component. We could the either provide a helper to which the user has to pass the component - just like in the repo you posted. Or we could provide a convenience method getWrappedComponent() which works the same, but starts off with this.

I say we go with WrappedComponent then link to that repo in the docs. No need to provide our own helper, IMO.

No, not necessary. Linking to the repo is fine. We should just really make sure that stuff like this is made really clear in some kind of FAQ section or a separate testing section :)