Why not use propTypes directly?

[bali182]

Just stumbled upon this library, forgive me if I'm missing something obvious. But since the component to be tested has to be in scope already, why not just use it directly to get propTypes? Or was the data structure that react-docgen provides easier to inspect?

I mean:

module.exports = function fakeProps(Component, { optional = false } = {}) {
  assert(Component.propTypes)
  return restOfWhatYouDidBefore(Component.propTypes, optional)
}

And when using it I think it would be much more obvious to do something like this:

import MyComponent from './myComponent'
import fakeProps from 'react-fake-props'

const myProps = fakeProps(MyComponent)
const vDom = <MyComponent {...myProps} />

[typicode]

Hi @bali182,

I would've preferred this kind of API too ( fakeProps(MyComponent) but it was kind of complicated to get all the PropTypes. Not for basic PropTypes like PropTypes.string, but for nested ones like PropTypes.shape({ ... }) which return a function. Maybe there's a way.

But react-docgen is really great and battle tested, plus it makes it possible to support Flow too which is getting quite popular for React projects.

[bali182]

Ah that's understandable! Was worth asking though :)

[typicode]

Was worth asking though :)

Definitely :)
I've updated the README too, thanks for the question.

[AndersDJohnson]

I think this would still be valuable for non-Flow users. One advantage is it would allow use of real requires/imports, which may be needed for Jest's --findRelatedTests functionality.