[Unit Testing] Difficulties with mocking Firebase services in Jest/Angular environment
- 主要言語
- TypeScript
- スター
- 7.8k
- フォーク
- 2.2k
- 平均マージ
- 22時間 28分
- マージ済み PR(30日)
- 6
説明
When using @angular/fire/compat or @angular/fire to build Angular applications, we encounter significant challenges when trying to perform unit tests with a testing framework like Jest.
The main issue stems from the tight coupling of the Auth service (and others like Storage or Firestore) to the FirebaseApp instance. Functions like getAuth() and initializeApp() are called implicitly or explicitly by the AngularFire component, which leads to the FirebaseError: No Firebase App '[DEFAULT]' has been created error.
The core problem is that we cannot properly mock these functions before the component attempts to access them. Standard mocking techniques (e.g., jest.mock, TestBed.configureTestingModule providers) fail because the functions are either read-only properties or are called in a context where a FirebaseApp instance is expected, but not yet available.
This forces developers to use fragile workarounds to get tests to pass, making the testing process difficult and prone to errors. It also discourages writing comprehensive unit tests for components that depend on Firebase services.
Suggested Improvement:
We would appreciate it if the AngularFire team could provide an official, documented strategy for unit testing with Jest. A potential solution could involve a testing utility library or a recommended pattern that correctly mocks the underlying FirebaseApp instance and its dependent services in a reliable way.
コントリビューションガイド
調査の方向性
まず、Jest を使用する @angular/fire/compat または @angular/fire を使った Angular アプリケーションで FirebaseError: No Firebase App '[DEFAULT]' has been created を再現します。getAuth()、initializeApp()、TestBed.configureTestingModule の相互作用を確認します。リポジトリが、Firebase に依存する Angular サービス向けの信頼性が高く文書化された Jest テスト戦略またはユーティリティを提供できれば完了です。
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
評価
- 技術スタック
- angular, firebase, typescript
- 領域
- frontend, testing
- issue の種類
- ドキュメント
- 難易度
- 5/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1週間以上
- 活発さ
- 停滞
- 明瞭さ
- 説明が足りない
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 28/100