TL;DR: A prototypical animal which looks like an A+ Promise but doesn't defer immediately, so can run synchronously, for testing. Technically, this makes it not A+ compliant, since part of the A+ spec is that resolution be asynchronous.
This means that I unfortunately can't run the official tests at https://github.com/promises-aplus/promises-tests. As such, I rely on issue reports from users and welcome contributions.
If synchronous-promise
has made something easier for you and you'd like to say thanks,
check out my sponsors page.
The standard ES6 Promise (and any others which are A+ compliant) push the promise logic to the background immediately, departing from the mechanisms employed in years past by promise implementations in libraries such as jQuery and Q.
This is a good thing -- for production code. But it can make testing more convoluted than it really needs to be.
Often, in a test, we're stubbing out a function which would return a promise (eg http call, show a modal dialog requiring user interaction) with a promise that resolves immediately, eg (using, mocha/sinon/chai):
describe('the thing', () => {
it('will do some stuff', () => {
// Arrange
const asyncLibraryFake = {
someMethod: sinon.stub().returns(Promise.resolve('happy value!'))
},
sut = createSystemUnderTestWith(asyncLibraryFake);
// Act
sut.doSomethingInteresting();
// Assert
// [*]
})
});
[*] Ideally, we'd just have assertions here, but the code above has backgrounded, so we're not going to get our expected results unless we employ async testing strategies ourselves.
One strategy would be to return the promise from asyncLibraryFake.someMethod from the doSomethingInteresting function and perform our asserts in there:
describe('the thing', () => {
it('will do some stuff', done => {
// Arrange
const asyncLibraryFake = {
someMethod: sinon.stub().returns(Promise.resolve('happy value!'))
},
sut = createSystemUnderTestWith(asyncLibraryFake);
// Act
sut.doSomethingInteresting().then(() => {
// Assert
done()
});
})
});
And there's nothing wrong with this strategy.
I need to put that out there before anyone takes offense or thinks that I'm suggesting
that they're "doing it wrong".
If you're doing this (or something very similar), great; async/await
, if available,
can make this code quite clean and linear too.
However, when we're working on more complex interactions, eg when we're not testing the final result of a promise chain, but rather testing a side-effect at some step during that promise chain, this can become more effort to test (and, imo, make your testing more unclear).
Many moons ago, using, for example, Q, we could create a deferred object with
Q.defer()
and then resolve or reject ith with deferred.resolve()
and
deferred.reject()
. Since there was no initial backgrounding, we could set
up a test with an unresolved promise, make some pre-assertions, then resolve
and make assertions about "after resolution" state, without making our tests
async at all. It made testing a little easier (imo) and the idea has been
propagated into frameworks like angular-mocks
SynchronousPromise looks (from the outside) a lot like an ES6 promise. We construct the same:
var promise = new SynchronousPromise((resolve, reject) => {
if (Math.random() < 0.1) {
reject('unlucky!');
} else {
resolve('lucky!');
}
});
They can, of course, be chained:
var initial = new SynchronousPromise((resolve, reject) => {
resolve('happy!');
});
initial.then(message => {
console.log(message);
})
And have error handling, either from the basic A+ spec:
initial.then(message => {
console.log(message);
}, error => {
console.error(error);
});
Or using the more familiar catch()
:
initial.then(message => {
console.log(message);
}).catch(error => {
console.error(error);
})
.catch()
starts a new promise chain, so you can pick up with new logic
if you want to. .then()
can deal with returning raw values or promises
(as per A+)
SynchronousPromise
also supports .finally()
as of version 2.0.8.
.all()
, .resolve()
and .reject()
are available on the SynchronousPromise
object itself:
SynchronousPromise.all([p1, p2]).then(results => {
// results is an array of results from all promises
}).catch(err => {
// err is any single error thrown by a promise in the array
});
SynchronousPromise.resolve('foo'); // creates an already-resolved promise
SynchronousPromise.reject('bar'); // creats an already-rejected promise
(race()
isn't because I haven't determined a good strategy for that yet,
considering the synchronous design goal -- but it's
unlikely you'll need race()
from a test).
SynchronousPromise
also provides two extra functions to make testing a little
easier:
The unresolved()
method returns a new, unresolved SynchronousPromise
with
the constructor-function-provided resolve
and reject
functions attached as properties.
Use this when you have no intention of resolving or rejecting the promise or when you
want to resolve or reject at some later date.
var
resolvedValue,
rejectedValue,
promise = SynchronousPromise.unresolved().then(function(data) {
resolvedValue = data;
}).catch(function(data) {
rejectedValue = data;
});
// at this point, resolved and rejected are both undefined
// ... some time later ...
if (Math.random() > 0.5) {
promise.resolve("yay");
// now resolvedValue is "yay" and rejectedValue is still undefined
} else {
promise.reject("boo");
// now rejectedValue is "boo" and resolvedValue is still undefined
}
pause()
pauses the promise chain at the point at which it is called:
SynchronousPromise.resolve('abc').then(data => {
// this will be run
return '123';
}).pause().then(data2 => {
// we don't get here without resuming
});
and resume()
resumes operations:
var
promise = SynchronousPromise.resolve('123').pause(),
captured = null;
promise.then(data => {
captured = data;
});
expect(captured).to.be.null; // because we paused...
promise.resume();
expect(captured).to.equal('123'); // because we resumed...
You can use pause()
and resume()
to test the state of your system under
test at defined points in a series of promise chains
SynchronousPromise is purposefully written with prototypical, ES5 syntax so you
can use it from ES5 if you like. Use the synchronous-promise.js
file from the
dist
folder if you'd like to include it in a browser environment (eg karma).
The synchronous-promise
package includes an index.d.ts
. To install, run:
typings install npm:synchronous-promise --save
On any modern TypeScript (v2+), you shouldn't need to do this.
Also note that TypeScript does async/await cleverly, treating all promises
equally, such that await
will work just fine against a SynchronousPromise -- it just won't be backgrounded.
HOWEVER: there is a very specific way that SynchronousPromise can interfere with TypeScript: if
- SynchronousPromise is installed globally (ie, overriding the
native
Promise
implementation) and - You create a SynchronousPromise which is resolved asynchronously, eg:
global.Promise = SynchronousPromise;
await new SynchronousPromise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve(), 0);
}); // this will hang
This is due to how TypeScript generates the __awaiter
function
which is yielded
to provide async
/await
functionality, in
particular that the emitted code assumes that the global Promise
will always be asynchronous, which is normally a reasonable assumption.
Installing SynchronousPromise globally may be a useful testing tactic,
which I've used in the past, but I've seen this exact issue crop up
in production code. SynchronousPromise
therefor also provides two methods:
installGlobally
uninstallGlobally
which can be used if your testing would be suited to having Promise
globally
overridden by SynchronousPromise
. This needs to get the locally-available __awaiter
and the result (enclosed with a reference to the real Promise
)
must override that __awaiter
, eg:
declare var __awaiter: Function;
beforeEach(() => {
__awaiter = SynchronousPromise.installGlobally(__awaiter);
});
afterEach(() => {
SynchronousPromise.uninstallGlobally();
});
It's not elegant that client code needs to know about the transpiled code, but this works.
I have an issue open on GitHub
microsoft/TypeScript#19909
but discussion so far has not been particularly convincing that
TypeScript emission will be altered to (imo) a more robust
implementation which wraps the emitted __awaiter
in a closure.
The main aim of SynchronousPromise is to facilitate easier testing. That being
said, it appears to conform to expected Promise
behaviour, barring the
always-backgrounded behaviour. One might be tempted to just use it everywhere.
However: I'd highly recommend using any of the more venerable promise implementations instead of SynchronousPromise in your production code -- preferably the vanilla ES6 Promise, where possible (or the shim, where you're in ES5). Or Q. Or jQuery.Deferred(), Bluebird or any of the implementations at https://promisesaplus.com/implementations.
Basically, this seems to work quite well for testing and
I've tried to implement every behaviour I'd expect from a promise -- but I'm
pretty sure that a native Promise
will be better for production code any day.