Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs(jest-mock): Add example for ES6 modules #8550

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Jun 12, 2019
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions CHANGELOG.md
Expand Up @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@

- `[jest-leak-detector]` remove code repeat ([#8438](https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/8438)
- `[docs]` Add example to `jest.requireActual` ([#8482](https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/8482)
- `[docs]` Add example to `jest.mock` for mocking ES6 modules with the `factory` parameter ([#8550](https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/8550))

### Performance

Expand Down
17 changes: 17 additions & 0 deletions docs/JestObjectAPI.md
Expand Up @@ -240,6 +240,23 @@ const moduleName = require('../moduleName');
moduleName(); // Will return '42';
```

When using the `factory` parameter for an ES6 module with a default export, the `__esModule: true` property needs to be specified:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you add something about how both Babel's and TypeScript's module transform looks for this property? Without that context, it might look really weird, I think 🙂

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually had to research that :). Does something like that work?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think so. Thanks!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pleasure!


```js
import moduleName, {foo} from '../moduleName';

jest.mock('../moduleName', () => {
return {
__esModule: true,
default: jest.fn(() => 42),
foo: jest.fn(() => 43),
};
});

moduleName(); // Will return 42
foo(); // Will return 43
```

The third argument can be used to create virtual mocks – mocks of modules that don't exist anywhere in the system:

```js
Expand Down