High Impact Suggestions for the Team

Aberta
  • Algo errado?
#21 6 comentários 9 reações 0 responsáveis Ver no GitHub

@vassudanagunta já está trabalhando nisso.

Desde 7/3/2026.

Avaliação

Dificuldade
5/5
Tempo estimado
Mais de uma semana
Facilidade para iniciantes
18/100
Tipo de issue
Funcionalidade
Clareza
Precisa de esclarecimento
Status de atividade
Estagnada
Stack de tecnologia
javascript, node.js
Domínio
developer-experience, testing-qa, tooling

Direção de pesquisa

Start by separating the proposed work into the linked coverage, npm scripts, console output, and module mocking issues, then review the referenced Console implementation and pull request. The issue has no single entry point or acceptance criterion; each proposal would need its own scope, design, and definition of done.

Escrita pelo modelo de indexação a partir do texto da issue.

Descrição

test_runner-agenda

Hi Test Runner Team,

I realize that everyone here is a volunteer and contributes whatever they want (or doesn't even contribute at all). There are some issues that I think may be flying under your radar that I think could have a big impact on the test runner experience:

  • Finish/stabilize code coverage. I've seen this in use a fair amount in the wild, but people always point out that it is still experimental. I think it's worth evaluating the accuracy and considering stabilizing it. The performance would also be good to look at, but should not be considered a blocker since it can be improved without impacting users. Coverage also does not support statement level coverage, but this should not be a blocker because:
    • This is an artifact of V8's coverage output. Outside of changing V8, getting statement level coverage would require an additional parsing pass over all of the source code to map statements to positions in files. This would almost certainly be bad for performance.
    • I believe C8 also does not support statement coverage for V8 output. My understanding is that line coverage is reported as statement coverage because it's good enough.
    • It can always be added in a semver minor change if someone comes up with a good solution.
  • Combining test runner flags with npm scripts (https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/51384) - There are some possible solutions described in that thread. Right now, it's possible to work around this with NODE_OPTIONS, but it's not really a nice solution. That issue appears to be a blocker to jsdom adopting the test runner for example. This would be a massive DX improvement.
  • Properly associating console.log() output with its test in the reported output (https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/53103) - One way to solve this could be to add code to Console, similar to what diagnostic channels do. Then, that code could integrate with the test runner's reporter functionality. This would be a massive DX improvement.
  • Stabilize module mocking. If https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/61767 lands, I think it would make sense to leverage that first. I wanted to do something similar when I originally wrote the mocking code, but I anticipated there being FAR more pushback on breaking spec compliance then there has been in #61767. For ESM in particular, #61767 has the potential to greatly improve the DX of module mocking.

Some other nice to have changes would be:

  • Migrate the test runner off of async_hooks. Now that AsyncContextFrame, it may be possible to achieve the same functionality, and I believe the project would like to get rid of async_hooks. Currently, async_hooks are only used to map asynchronous activity back to the test that initiated it. I haven't investigated what it would take to make this change in much detail.
  • Give the spec reporter a new paint job. As long as you don't change the programmatic behavior of the reporter, we are free to change the actual output (text, colors, etc.) of the reporters without regard for semver. This has the potential to be a big DX improvement.
Linguagem predominante
Sem dados de linguagem
Estrelas
3
Forks
4
Nenhum PR com merge em 30d

Preparar o ambiente

Primeiros passos

  1. Leia a issue inteira e depois o guia de contribuição do projeto.
  2. Comente na issue dizendo que vai assumir — evita que duas pessoas façam o mesmo trabalho.
  3. Faça um fork do repositório e trabalhe em uma branch.
  4. Abra um pull request que referencie o número da issue.

Mais de nodejs/test-runner

Todas as issues de nodejs/test-runner

Issues semelhantes

Mais issues de DevTools

Receba novas issues na sua caixa de entrada

Um resumo curto de issues do GitHub para quem está começando.