test.todo should allow and ignore implementation function

[samgladstone]

🚀 Feature Proposal

I was hoping to reopen the discussion about whether test.todo should ignore a passed in function for the second parameter rather than throwing an error.

This was discussed in original issue, but it seemed to peter out.

Motivation

I see two reasons why this could be helpful:

1. For stubbing tests (see the original issue)
2. The test cannot be finalised for some reason

Example

test.todo('This is a test', () => {
  // something to come back to...
});

Pitch

This is an extension existing functionality.

[jeysal]

I've also thought about this a couple of times when todo screamed at me for providing a second argument, but then again I personally believe it's worth it to avoid the possibility of forgetting to change test.todo to test after writing it out, being happy that the test run passes, and shipping the code. If you have some WIP code to store, in a comment below it'll be way more obvious that it's not being run yet.

[samgladstone]

I'm currently in the position where I want to test something that partly depends on the implementation of another package. However, the other package has some inconsistencies that are meaning its hard to write the test.

I don't want to throw away what I have written, as intend to keep an eye on it to come back to at some point.

The alternatives that I see are to use:

test.skip

I would prefer that my code skips 0 tests by default. I often work by temporarily adding test.only or test.skip to see how things are going. But, I don't want to leave any of these in the code by accident. So I think it's reasonable to prefer to have 0 .skips and some .todos checked in.

Wrap it in a describe

So the next best alternative, at least IMO, is to wrap the todo in a describe block:

describe('todo: This is the test description', () => {
  test.todo('Do this');

  const implementation = () => {

 }
});

It's okay, but I think it's cleaner to just put it in the todo?

---

@jeysal, I see what you are saying, I guess I am coming it from the other way round! I realised I missed one only that I missed and I didn't catch it because of the skips I had.

[github-actions]

This issue is stale because it has been open for 1 year with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 14 days.

[SimenB]

@samgladstone I think that use case is better covered by a test.failing or something (https://github.com/avajs/ava/blob/main/docs/01-writing-tests.md#failing-tests).

If you're interested, please write up a feature request for that - I think the current behaviour of todo should remain as is

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.