1144797 - Add a utility jsm into the scope of ContentTasks

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Testing :: Mochitest, defect)

Description

[Steven MacLeod [:smacleod]]

It would be great to have a common JSM loaded into the scope of any spawned ContentTasks where common utility methods could live. I'm thinking something like BrowserTestUtils introduced in Bug 1093566.

Comment 1

[Mike Conley (:mconley) (:⚙️)]

Attachment: MozReview Request: bz://1144797/mconley

/r/6227 - Bug 1144797 - Add setInterval and clearInterval to Timer.jsm. r=?
/r/6229 - Bug 1144797 - Add ContentTestUtils.jsm into ContentTask scope. r=?

Pull down these commits:

hg pull review -r 90967c8b6dc47f638d3dcc5eb073f304639f8c65

Comment 2

[Mike Conley (:mconley) (:⚙️)]

Comment on attachment 8584859 [details]
MozReview Request: bz://1144797/mconley

/r/6227 - Bug 1144797 - Add setInterval and clearInterval to Timer.jsm. r=?
/r/6229 - Bug 1144797 - Add ContentTestUtils.jsm into ContentTask scope. r=?

Pull down these commits:

hg pull review -r 90967c8b6dc47f638d3dcc5eb073f304639f8c65

Comment 3

[Steven MacLeod [:smacleod]]

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/6227/#review5297

::: toolkit/modules/tests/xpcshell/test_timer.js
(Diff revision 1)
> -function run_test(browser, tab, document) {
> -  do_test_pending();
> +function run_test() {
> +  run_next_test();
> +}

You should be able to remove this since you're using add_task, no?

Comment 4

[Steven MacLeod [:smacleod]]

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/6229/#review5295

::: testing/mochitest/BrowserTestUtils/moz.build
(Diff revision 1)
> +    'ContentTestUtils.jsm',

ContentTasks are used in tests only - so instead of including "test" in the name I think I'd prefer "ContentTaskUtils".

::: testing/mochitest/BrowserTestUtils/ContentTestUtils.jsm
(Diff revision 1)
> +  promiseCondition(condition, msg, interval=100, maxTries=50) {

With the other new unified test modules BrowserTestUtils and TestUtils we're avoiding the "promise<blah>" names and prefering "<thing><verbed>" or "waitFor<thing>" since everything returns a promise.

How about "conditionMet" or "waitForCondition"?

::: testing/mochitest/BrowserTestUtils/ContentTestUtils.jsm
(Diff revision 1)
> +const { utils: Cu } = Components;

Lets go ahead and bring them all in:
    const {classes: Cc, interfaces: Ci, utils: Cu, results: Cr} = Components;

Comment 5

[Steven MacLeod [:smacleod]]

Comment on attachment 8584859 [details]
MozReview Request: bz://1144797/mconley

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/6225/#review5299

Fix it, then ship-it!

Comment 6

[Mike Conley (:mconley) (:⚙️)]

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/6227/#review5301

> You should be able to remove this since you're using add_task, no?

That's what I thought too - but apparently, xpcshell tests are special. :/

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/QA/Writing_xpcshell-based_unit_tests#XPCShell_test_utility_functions

Comment 7

[Mike Conley (:mconley) (:⚙️)]

Thanks!

remote:   https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/c56d6f0226f2
remote:   https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/41038ff05418

Comment 8

[Carsten Book [:Tomcat]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/c56d6f0226f2
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/41038ff05418

Comment 10

[Mike Conley (:mconley) (:⚙️)]

Attachment: MozReview Request: Bug 1144797 - Add setInterval and clearInterval to Timer.jsm. r=?

Comment 11

[Mike Conley (:mconley) (:⚙️)]

Attachment: MozReview Request: Bug 1144797 - Add ContentTestUtils.jsm into ContentTask scope. r=?