search

jejacks0n / teaspoon

Teaspoon: Javascript test runner for Rails. Use Selenium, BrowserStack, or PhantomJS.
1.43k stars 243 forks source link

Support .js.jsx.coffee file extension in Teaspoon::Suite #391

Closed plongyear closed 9 years ago

plongyear commented 9 years ago

We are writing specs for React components. We are using the .js.jsx.coffee file extension so we can use jsx in our specs.

When we try to view these files in our suite by browsing to /teaspoon, the files show up as filename.js.jsx.js. Updating normalize_js_extension causes the files to show up correctly when viewing the files at /teaspoon.

Is this the preferred way of supporting new file extensions?

jejacks0n commented 9 years ago

@plongyear, thanks for this.

@mikepack, we could move that regex to an undocumented, or lightly documented configuration? It feels dirty to me, but I don't see another way around it. Thoughts, ideas?

mikepack commented 9 years ago

@jejacks0n seems reasonable as a config, even with full documentation. Though as a config it should be an array of regexes instead of a single regex with ors. Why's it feel dirty?

jejacks0n commented 9 years ago

I think a single regex is fine, but is up to whoever gets around to it, which will probably be you. It just is a bummer because we have to resolve files to sprockets urls.

plongyear commented 9 years ago

@jejacks0n @mikepack - I agree, a config file sounds like a great idea.

Since the inline regex is the current way file extensions are being resolved, do you think it makes sense to merge this for now until someone is able to get around to implementing the config approach? It would be great if we could get this in to get our specs to run properly.

plongyear commented 9 years ago

I also added a commit that supports both the .js.jsx and .js.jsx.coffee extensions.

mikepack commented 9 years ago

@plongyear I'd say it's probably best to point your Gemfile at your fork until we're able to address this correctly.

plongyear commented 9 years ago

@mikepack thanks, will do.

jejacks0n commented 9 years ago

@mikepack addressed this, so it's now possible via #418. Thanks for the insight and help figuring out what we could to resolve it!