when using waitForDomChange on chrome 70 : setImmediate is not defined

[brucou]

• dom-testing-library version:
  3.16.1
• react version:
  not using react
• node version:
  v8.2.0
• npm (or yarn) version:
  v5.3.0

Relevant code or config:

  waitForDomChange({ container: root })

What you did:

I ran tests in the browser with QUnit and dom-testing-library.
I tried to use the waitForDomChange API.

What happened:

Uncaught ReferenceError: setImmediate is not defined
    at onDone (dom-testing-library.js:4344)
    at MutationObserver.<anonymous> (dom-testing-library.js:4338)

Reproduction:

can't reproduce in codesandbox. When I try to import {waitForDomChange} from "dom-testing-library" :

(0 , _domTestingLibrary.waitForDomChange) is not a function

Problem description:

That code from the library use a function which is not defined in chrome :

function waitForDomChange(_temp) {
    var _ref = _temp === void 0 ? {} : _temp,
      _ref$container = _ref.container,
      container = _ref$container === void 0 ? getDocument() : _ref$container,
      _ref$timeout = _ref.timeout,
      timeout = _ref$timeout === void 0 ? 4500 : _ref$timeout,
      _ref$mutationObserver = _ref.mutationObserverOptions,
      mutationObserverOptions = _ref$mutationObserver === void 0 ? {
        subtree: true,
        childList: true,
        attributes: true,
        characterData: true
      } : _ref$mutationObserver;

    return new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
      var timer = setTimeout(function () {
        onDone(new Error('Timed out in waitForDomChange.'), null);
      }, timeout);
      var observer = newMutationObserver(function (mutationsList) {
        onDone(null, mutationsList);
      });
      observer.observe(container, mutationObserverOptions);

      function onDone(error, result) {
        clearTimeout(timer);
        setImmediate(function () {
          return observer.disconnect();
        });

        if (error) {
          reject(error);
        } else {
          resolve(result);
        }
      }
    });
  }

[alexkrolick]

Very strange - checking the console for this page (github): window.setTimeout and window.setInterval are both available as globals, but window.setImmediate is not. It's probably polyfilled in.

https://caniuse.com/#search=setImmediate

setTimeout(fn, 0) should be a fine replacement

[brucou]

yeah it is used in only 5% of the browsers... I mocked it as you suggested, but that would be much better replaced at the source. What do you think? It is only used in two places in the code, for waitForDomChange and waitForElement.

I bet this has not appeared so far because nobody used the library in a real browser, like I do, so there are all sorts of discrepancies appearing vs. jsdom and the copycats.

[alexkrolick]

Yes, it should be replaced in the library. Care to make a PR?

[brucou]

eer how do I do that? ok, I just have to create a branch I see. Will do that tomorrow first thing

[kentcdodds]

Hi @brucou 👋

We're here to help you! Start here: http://makeapullrequest.com

Let us know if you need help!

[brucou]

amazing, looking forward to reading it. I always wondered how that works.

[kentcdodds]

@brucou,

Are you still interested in making this contribution?

[brucou]

xmas and new year\s eve got in the way. Still have a tough week. If there is no rush, let a week pass and if I haven't done anything about it by then, then go ahead and do the change. Would that work?

[kentcdodds]

Yep! No worries 😁

[brucou]

one question : there is a __tests__ directory with jest tests. I am going to test this feature in a real browser, so is it ok if I use Qunit? and create another directory called tests instead of tests? or what do you advise?

[kentcdodds]

That's a great point @brucou. I'm not sure. I think it'd probably be cool to have a test or two that run in a real browser (using Karma), but I think I'd rather use mocha for two reasons:

1. I'm personally more familiar with mocha
2. mocha is a LOT more widely used than Qunit

I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have tests that run in a real browser, but if you really would like to do this then you're welcome to do so :)

[brucou]

I used mocha in the past, I am cool with it but I have no appetite to learn karma and the associated config though. PR done.

…

On 1/4/19, Kent C. Dodds ***@***.***> wrote: That's a great point @brucou. I'm not sure. I think it'd probably be cool to have a test or two that run in a real browser (using Karma), but I think I'd rather use mocha for two reasons: 1. I'm personally more familiar with mocha 2. mocha is a LOT more widely used than Qunit I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have tests that run in a real browser, but if you really would like to do this then you're welcome to do so :) -- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #184 (comment)

-- ---

[kentcdodds]

Fixed! Thanks!

[kentcdodds]

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 3.16.3 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

[brucou]

Forgot to thank you for the support Kent and Alex in making that pull request. That was really appreciated! and the learning material is awesome.

[kentcdodds]

Awesome! Congrats on the PR @brucou! 👍