Added includeStackTrace configuration option

[Hargne]

• Added includeStackTrace configuration option (fixes Added into report configuration additional flag "includeStackTrace": false #160 )
• Optimized IJestHTMLReporterConfig type

[StefanPuia]

I've made those couple changes here
e7e9f04

[StefanPuia]

.only probably blocks the rest of the tests in the suite here

[Hargne]

Perfect! I must have forgotten to remove it while testing 🙏

[StefanPuia]

took me a while to get my head around what's going on
failureMessages is the error.stack value, which means it will always have the message, stack, and Error: at the beginning
failureDetails on the other hand will have maybe always just Error objects: jest source (creates object here)
so we can probably have something like this here, instead of the regex replace:

/////// htmlreporter.ts:394
// Test Failure Messages
if (
  test.failureDetails &&
  test.failureDetails.length > 0 &&
  this.getConfigValue("includeFailureMsg")
) {
  const failureMsgDiv = testResult.ele(
    "div",
    {
      class: "failureMessages",
    },
    " "
  );
  test.failureDetails.forEach((err: Error) => {
    failureMsgDiv.ele(
      "pre",
      { class: "failureMsg" },
      this.sanitizeOutput(err.message)
    );
  });
}

[StefanPuia]

re: #161 (comment)

[StefanPuia]

could we use failureDetails instead?

[Hargne]

@StefanPuia I get your idea. However, as far as I can see failureDetails is of type: Array<unknown>, meaning that we cannot be sure what it returns. I tried to investigate if there was a type we could use, but to no avail. In your example above you typed it as Array<Error>, but in fact it returns an array of objects:

[
  {
    matcherResult: {
      actual: 'something',
      expected: 'something-else,
      message: 'expect(received).toEqual(expected) // deep equality' +
        '\n' +
        'Expected: "something-else' +
        'Received: "something"',
      name: 'toEqual',
      pass: false
    }
  }
]

I cannot see the stack trace in there either, which is the main reason of this PR: to hide/show the stack trace. And in the end: doing this yields the same result as using failureMessages, so I cannot really see the benefit.

[StefanPuia]

My bad, I only included the replacement for the current version. For this issue specifically we'd just have to replace
this.sanitizeOutput(err.message) with something like this.sanitizeOutput(this.getConfigValue("includeStackTrace") ? err.stack : err.message)

I suppose using unknown is not great, but I'm not a huge fan of the substring solution either... That will have adverse effects if the characters at exist anywhere to the left of the stack trace (e.g.:

                            ⌄ will probably get trimmed here
Error: Some error message that contains the keyword
  Expected: 1
  Received: 2
  
  at Foo.bar (Foo.js:12:5)

maybe something like this would work better?

failureMsg.split(/\n\s+at/)[0].trim().replace(/\n+$/, "")

[Hargne]

Good point about the regex, and I totally agree. I will look at a more solid solution.

For this issue specifically we'd just have to replace
this.sanitizeOutput(err.message) with something like this.sanitizeOutput(this.getConfigValue("includeStackTrace") ? err.stack : err.message)

failureDetails does not have a stack property, only a matcherResult object which may contain a message without the stack trace

[StefanPuia]

That's fair enough. failureDetails would probably be up to the test runner implementation so it's better not to assume anything about it.