AngularJS Tests With An HTTP Mock

 Let’s look at a controller that likes to communicate over the network.

(function (module) {
 
    var MoviesController = function ($scope, $http) {
 
        $http.get("/api/movies")
            .then(function (result) {
                $scope.movies = result.data;
            });
    };
 
    module.controller("MoviesController",
        ["$scope", "$http", MoviesController]);
 
}(angular.module("myApp")));

If you want a unit test to execute without network communication there are a couple options. You could refactor the controller to use a custom service to fetch movies instead of using $http directly. Then in a unit test it would be easy to provide a fake service that returns pre-canned responses.

Another option is to use angular-mocks. Angular mocks includes a programmable fake $httpBackend that replaces the real $httpBackend service. It is important to note that $httpBackend is not the same as the $http service. The $http service uses $httpBackend to send HTTP messages. In a unit test, we’ll use the real $http service, but a fake $httpBackend programmed to respond in a specific way.

Here is one approach:

describe("myApp", function () {
 
    beforeEach(module('myApp'));
 
    describe("MoviesController", function () {
 
        var scope, httpBackend;
        beforeEach(inject(function ($rootScope, $controller, $httpBackend, $http) {
            scope = $rootScope.$new();
            httpBackend = $httpBackend;
            httpBackend.when("GET", "/api/movies").respond([{}, {}, {}]);
            $controller('MoviesController', {
                $scope: scope,
                $http: $http
            });
        }));
 
        it("should have 3 movies", function () {
            httpBackend.flush();
            expect(scope.movies.length).toBe(3);
        });
    });
});

In the above test, $httpBackend is programmed (with the when method) to respond to a GET request with three objects (empty objects, since the controller in this example never uses the data, but only assigns the response to the model).

For the data to arrive in the model, the test needs to call the flush method. Flush will respond to all requests with the programmed responses. The flush method will also verify there are no outstanding expectations. Writing tests with expectations is a little bit different.

describe("myApp", function () {
 
    beforeEach(module('myApp'));
 
    describe("MoviesController", function () {
 
        var scope, httpBackend, http, controller;
        beforeEach(inject(function ($rootScope, $controller, $httpBackend, $http) {
            scope = $rootScope.$new();
            httpBackend = $httpBackend;
            http = $http;
            controller = $controller;
            httpBackend.when("GET", "/api/movies").respond([{}, {}, {}]);
        }));
       
        it('should GET movies', function () {
            httpBackend.expectGET('/api/movies');
            controller('MoviesController', {
                $scope: scope,
                $http: http
            });
            httpBackend.flush();
        });
    });
});

The expectation in the above code is registered with the expectGET method. When the test calls flushflush will fail the test if the controller did not make all of the expect calls. Of the two tests in this post, I prefer the first style. Testing with expectations is the same as interaction testing with mocks, which I’ve learned to shy away from because interaction testing tends to be brittle.

Simple Unit Tests With AngularJS

For those of you that have company sites that still use AngularJs 1.3 - 1.6, heres a short help on how to unit test your code.

One of the benefits of using AngularJS is the ability to unit test the JavaScript code in a complex application. Unit testing is incredibly easy for trivial cases when controllers and models are declared in global scope. However unit testing is slightly more challenging for objects defined inside of Angular modules because of the need to bootstrap modules, work with a dependency injector, and deal with the subtleties of nested functional code. 

Let’s try to test the following controller defined in a module:

(function (app) {
     
    var SimpleController = function ($scope) {
      
        $scope.x = 3;
        $scope.y = 4;
        $scope.doubleIt = function () {
            $scope.x *= 2;
            $scope.y *= 2;
        };
    };
     
    app.controller("SimpleController", 
             ["$scope", SimpleController]);
     
}(angular.module("myApp")));

We’ll be using AngularJS mocks and Jasmine in an HTML page, which requires the following scripts:

- jasmine.js

- jasmine-html.js

- angular.js

- angular-mocks.js

- simpleController.js (where the controller lives)

It’s important to include the Jasmine scripts before including angular-mocks, as angular-mocks will enable some additional features when Jasmine is present (notably the helper methods module and inject).

describe("myApp", function() {
 
    beforeEach(module('myApp'));
 
    describe("SimpleController", function() {
 
        var scope;
        beforeEach(inject(function($rootScope, $controller) {
            scope = $rootScope.$new();
            $controller("SimpleController", {
                $scope: scope
            });
        }));
 
        it("should double the numbers", function() {
            scope.doubleIt();
            expect(scope.x).toBe(6);
        });
    });
});