Remove mock/test widgets

[handeyeco]

Summary:

I don't see the point of having a bunch of test widgets when we could just use real widgets in tests.

Open to push back.

[github-actions]

Size Change: -2.7 kB (-0.31%)

Total Size: 859 kB

Filename	Size	Change
packages/perseus-editor/dist/es/index.js	275 kB	-2.7 kB (-0.97%)

ℹ️ View Unchanged

Filename	Size
packages/kas/dist/es/index.js	38.3 kB
packages/keypad-context/dist/es/index.js	760 B
packages/kmath/dist/es/index.js	4.27 kB
packages/math-input/dist/es/index.js	78 kB
packages/math-input/dist/es/strings.js	1.79 kB
packages/perseus-core/dist/es/index.js	1.48 kB
packages/perseus-linter/dist/es/index.js	22.2 kB
packages/perseus/dist/es/index.js	418 kB
packages/perseus/dist/es/strings.js	3.36 kB
packages/pure-markdown/dist/es/index.js	3.66 kB
packages/simple-markdown/dist/es/index.js	12.4 kB

_{compressed-size-action}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 70.30%. Comparing base (a6ec402) to head (af4b804).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1577      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   70.39%   70.30%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         554      571      +17     
  Lines      107555   111385    +3830     
  Branches     5530    11212    +5682     
==========================================
+ Hits        75717    78309    +2592     
- Misses      31722    33076    +1354     
+ Partials      116        0     -116     

see 1117 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update a6ec402...af4b804. Read the comment docs.

[khan-actions-bot]

Gerald

Required Reviewers

• @Khan/perseus for changes to .changeset/plenty-crews-wink.md, packages/perseus/src/perseus-types.ts, packages/perseus-editor/src/all-editors.ts, packages/perseus-editor/src/index.ts, packages/perseus/src/__testdata__/renderer.testdata.ts, packages/perseus/src/__testdata__/server-item-renderer.testdata.ts, packages/perseus/src/__tests__/extract-perseus-data.test.ts, packages/perseus/src/__tests__/mock-asset-loading-widget.tsx, packages/perseus/src/__tests__/renderer.test.tsx, packages/perseus/src/__tests__/server-item-renderer.test.tsx, packages/perseus-editor/src/util/register-all-widgets-and-editors-for-testing.ts, packages/perseus/src/multi-items/__testdata__/multi-renderer.testdata.ts, packages/perseus/src/multi-items/__tests__/multi-renderer.test.tsx

---

Don't want to be involved in this pull request? Comment #removeme and we won't notify you of further changes.

[github-actions]

npm Snapshot: Published

Good news!! We've packaged up the latest commit from this PR (af4b804) and published it to npm. You
can install it using the tag PR1577.

Example:

yarn add @khanacademy/perseus@PR1577

If you are working in Khan Academy's webapp, you can run:

./dev/tools/bump_perseus_version.sh -t PR1577

[jeremywiebe]

I'm definitely in favour of removing the example widgets, but I wonder if we want to keep the two mock widgets (or at least asset loading one) that are used in some of the tests. If we tie these tests to real widgets, we run the (possibly low) risk of breaking unrelated tests if we change the widget.

[jeremywiebe]

thought: I think this mocked asset loading widget might be one we want to keep. The image widget would be a widget that hooks into the asset loading context, but it may be tricky to assert that the ServerItemRenderer does the right thing using the implementation of a production widget, and not risk regression.

The implementation of that widget is extremely small. Also, I wonder if we could eliminate all the @ts-expect-error suppressions by simply adding the mock widget to the list of widgets, but mark it as hidden: true. Maybe that's a net negative though.

What do you think?

[handeyeco]

I came to the same conclusion as you: keep the widget. I chose to mark it as deprecated though so that people would at least be hesitant to use it (I personally think we should bias towards using real widgets when possible); that meant that I had to suppress "no deprecated" errors when using it.

I'd be fine removing the TODOs and deprecated stuff if you think that's best.

EDIT: I just went ahead and removed the deprecated stuff