add simple integration test with jsdom

[SimenB]

Includes both #162 and #168, plus an integration test using JSDOM.

This doesn't really work though, as window.performance is readonly in JSDOM. This matches the spec (or, at least it matches the text on MDN), but it does not match the behavior of Chrome.

The second commit skips faking performance, and the test passes. I don't like that, though.

window.performance is readonly, so instead of using simple assignment, this PR uses Object.defineProperty.

[SimenB]

I can look into having mochify skip the test same as node 4 if you want to keep the test.

[SimenB]

window.performance might have to be copied more cleanly, like Date is: https://github.com/sinonjs/lolex/blob/8966fde17a402f1fc88c05ac3398303c53cd7882/src/lolex-src.js#L121

[mantoni]

See my change here for the window.performace issue: https://github.com/sinonjs/lolex/pull/162/files

[SimenB]

@mantoni Yes, that part is included in the filter function I added.

The issue now (at least in this PR) is that window.performance is readonly, so hijackMethod explodes. Unless I'm misunderstanding something

[mantoni]

A sorry. The silly app I was viewing this in shows it as an issue instead of a PR 🙄

[SimenB]

@fatso83 any way of triggering the integration tests from a PR? I wonder if the last commit fixes the issue

[fatso83]

@SimenB I don't think we have a way of triggering the full suite of Saucelabs tests on the PRs. It's been a long time, but I think the reason why we chose not to do it was that it would open us up to exposing the secret key (or something like that) by aggressors adding PRs that would read out environment variables. Or something like that ... @mantoni might remember it better 😊

Anyway, I see you have your email listed on your profile, so I'll send you what you need so you can do it. In other news ™️ the last commit failed on PhantomJS.

[mantoni]

This is a Travis security restriction, unfortunately.

I have a general question regarding this RP: Wouldn't switching to the latest Mochify with headless Chrome make a JSDom test superfluous? Or is JSDom something we want to have explicitly tested?

[fatso83]

@mantoni Given the current work that is done on Jest to try and integrate lolex, which would touch a lot of users, I think it makes sense to support such a big target.

[SimenB]

@fatso83 @benjamingr this now passes CI, and npm run test-cloud 🙂

[mantoni]

👍 Looks good to me.

[fatso83]

Sorry for forgetting this, but could you just skip the comment here about copyright and all that?

[SimenB]

done

[SimenB]

A release of this would be awesome 😀