get 16 more or less in shape

Author: hjwp

chapter_16_javascript.asciidoc

@@ -472,10 +472,8 @@ Superlists tests
 ====
 
 
-// old content had a deliberate mistake where we started out without fixtures,
-// decided not to bother with that.
-// TODO: revisit that.  it's a nice learning journey.
 
+////
 
 === TODO: new plan
 
@@ -489,6 +487,7 @@ this chapter is a decent first pass now, want to improve it as follows:
 * see if just specifying it as a .js works, and we can do the chat about execution times.  then switch to .mjs and imports
 
 * split out tests, especially sense-check bits, into 3 different its
+////
 
 
 
@@ -906,7 +905,9 @@ Ran 1 test in 3.023s
 OK
 ----
 
-((("", startref="JSTkey16")))Hooray!  That's a commit!
+Hooray!  That's a commit!
+
+// ((("", startref="JSTkey16")))
 
 
 [subs="specialcharacters,quotes"]
@@ -1161,68 +1162,58 @@ A Few Things That Didn't Make It
 
 TODO update this
 
-((("JavaScript testing", "additional considerations for")))In
-this chapter I wanted to cover the very basics of JavaScript testing and how
-it fits into our TDD workflow in this chapter.  Here are a few pointers for
-further research:
-
-* At the moment, our test only checks that the JavaScript works on one page.
-  It works because we're including it in 'base.html', but if we'd only
-  added it to 'home.html' the tests would still pass.  It's a judgement
-  call, but you could choose to write an extra test here.
-
-* ((("JavaScript testing", "syntax errors")))When
-writing JavaScript, get as much help from your editor as you can to
-  avoid common "gotchas".  Check out syntax/error-checking tools like
-  "jslint" and "jshint", also known as "linters".
+((("JavaScript testing", "additional considerations for")))
+In this chapter I wanted to cover the very basics of JavaScript testing
+and how it fits into our TDD workflow in this chapter.
+Here are a few pointers for further research:
 
+* When writing JavaScript,
+  get as much help from your editor as you can to avoid common "gotchas".
+  Check out syntax/error-checking tools like `eslint` or `tsserver`.
+  ((("JavaScript testing", "syntax errors")))
 
-* ((("QUnit")))QUnit
-mainly expects you to "run" your tests using an actual web browser.
+* The Jasmine Browser Runner mainly expects you to "run" your tests using an actual web browser.
   This has the advantage that it's easy to create some HTML fixtures that
   match the kind of HTML your site actually contains, for tests to run against.
   But it's also possible to run JS tests from the command line.  We'll see
   an example in <<chapter_CI>>.
 
-* ((("MVC frameworks")))((("angular.js")))((("React")))The
-new shiny thing in the world of frontend development are MVC frameworks
-  like 'angular.js' and React.  ((("Jasmine")))Most
-tutorials for these use an RSpec-like
-  assertion library called https://jasmine.github.io/[Jasmine].  If you're
-  going to use one of them, you'll probably find life easier if you use Jasmine
-  rather than QUnit.
 
+There is more JavaScript fun in this book too!
+Have a look at the <<appendix_rest_api,Rest API appendix>>
+when you're ready for it.
+((("", startref="FTjava16")))
 
 
+TODO: something about the balance between selenium and js unit tests.
 
-
-There is more JavaScript fun in this book too!  Have a look at the
-<<appendix_rest_api,Rest API appendix>> when you're ready for it.((("", startref="FTjava16")))
+////
 
 
 [role="less_space pagebreak-before"]
 .JavaScript Testing Notes
 *******************************************************************************
 
-* ((("Selenium", "and JavaScript", secondary-sortas="JavaScript")))One
-of the great advantages of Selenium is that it allows you to test that
+* ((("Selenium", "and JavaScript", secondary-sortas="JavaScript")))
+  One of the great advantages of Selenium is that it allows you to test that
   your JavaScript really works, just as it tests your Python code.
 
-* ((("JavaScript testing", "test running libraries")))There
-are many JavaScript test running libraries out there.  QUnit is closely
-  tied to jQuery, which is the main reason I chose it.
+* There are many JavaScript test running libraries out there.
+  Jasmine has been around for a while,
+  but others like Jest and Mocha are not dissimilar.
+  ((("JavaScript testing", "test running libraries")))
 
-* ((("JavaScript testing", "managing global state")))((("global state")))No
+*
+((("JavaScript testing", "managing global state")))
+((("global state")))
+No
 matter which testing library you use, you'll always need to find solutions
   to the main challenge of JavaScript testing, which is about 'managing global
   state'.  That includes:
     - the DOM / HTML fixtures
     - namespacing
     - understanding and controlling execution order.
-
-* I don't really mean it when I say that JavaScript is awful. It can actually
-  be quite fun.  But I'll say it again: make sure you've read
-  <<jsgoodparts,'JavaScript: The Good Parts'>>.
+////
 
 *******************************************************************************