Skip to main content

Learning how to put JavaScript together properly

After many years of trial and error / practise I feel fairly happy that I can write clean, testable .NET / C# code, which is free of any external dependencies which traditionally make unit testing harder. It's fair to say that I'm convert to TDD; having implemented it on two separate commercial projects and seen the benefits of the improved maintainability of the code base over time.

But what about Javascript? Thanks to Selenium and Specflow the functionality of those websites is pretty well tested and by default that includes any JavaScript that may be referenced in the UI tests that are run. But that's not the same as having clean testable JavaScript. Those websites have typically included a mixture of JavaScript defined in-line as well as held separately within JS files. Most functionality has been provided by individual functions attached to events and any communication introduced by coupling of functions and/or attaching attributes to FORM elements. AJAX calls and DOM updates are mixed within the application logic making isolated testing pretty much impossible, basically everything we've spent the past years learning how to avoid in our .NET code bases.

But why does this happen? Experience and reading around on the web has highlighted that the above scenario is probably still the norm, rather than the exception. Is it really that difficult to write testable JavaScript? Is JavaScript such a difficult language to learn, or does it lend itself to writing messy code? I've met some very good .NET developers who openly admit that their JavaScript code doesn't live up to their own standards.

As part of the project that I'm now working on, I decided that I'd make sure that this time would be different. I wouldn't settle for writing inline JavaScript, nor would I settle for a mishmash of unrelated functions in the global namespace all somehow working together (and when they didn't I wouldn't just use alert's and console writes to debug what was happening!). This time I was going to write testable, modular JavaScript that was easy to unit test.

As part of this experiment I'll try keeping this blog updated with our findings, including patterns and practises we find that help. An initial search of the web came up with this article (by Ben Cherry) which details his findings when he joined Twitter: Writing testable Javascript. Interestingly this article highlights a few modifications people might want to consider to some currently recommended Javascript best practises to make your code more testable, namely staying away from singletons and not enclosing too much business logic - both valid suggestions that we stay away from in our .NET code for exactly the same reasons!


Popular posts from this blog

Mocking HttpCookieCollection in HttpRequestBase

When unit testing ASP.NET MVC2 projects the issue of injecting HttpContext is quickly encountered.  There seem to be many different ways / recommendations for mocking HttpContextBase to improve the testability of controllers and their actions.  My investigations into that will probably be a separate blog post in the near future but for now I want to cover something that had me stuck for longer than it probably should have.  That is how to mock non abstract/interfaced classes within HttpRequestBase and HttpResponseBase – namely the HttpCookieCollection class.   The code sample below illustrates how it can be used within a mocked instance of HttpRequestBase.  Cookies can be added / modified within the unit test code prior to being passed into the code being tested.   After it’s been called, using a combination of MOQ’s Verify and NUnit’s Assert it is possible to check how many times the collection is accessed (but you have to include the set up calls) and that the relevant cookies have …

Do "Task Hours" add anything in Scrum (Agile)?

What do task hours add to the overall process in scrum?This was a question that has arisen from all team members in both instances that I've helped teams switch over to scrum. The benefits of artifacts like the comparative story point estimation, the 2 week sprints, stand-ups and the end of sprint demo have been self evident to the team, but as one I think every team member has expressed dismay when it comes to task planning and estimating each task in hours. Left unchecked there is a natural tendency for people to actually begin to dread the start of each sprint purely due to the task planning session.In my current role we've been lucky to investigate this further as a team.The team sat down to discuss the problems it was experiencing with estimating tasks in hours and the following common themes appeared:It is hard: Maybe it shouldn't be, but time estimation is hard! Story points are comparative and abstracted making them easier to determine, but time estimate is gen…

Why do my Android Notification only appear in the status bar?

I'm definitely getting back into Android development, I'm remembering that feeling of 'Surely this should be easier than this!'. All I wanted to do was to schedule a local notification which behaved similar to a push notification pop-up. That is, as well as showing the small icon in the status bar I wanted it to pop up on screen to notify the end user. All seems fairly easily, I found this code for how to schedule a notification. That all worked perfectly, apart from the notification would only appear in the status bar. Searching around I found loads of different answers / solutions, mostly all saying the same thing:It only worked if you used 'NotificationCompat.Builder' in place of 'Notification.Builder', orYou had to set the priority to 'NotificationCompat.PRIORITY_HIGH'As usually happens, none of these solutions worked for me until I added in the missing piece of the jigsaw:- '.setDefaults(Notification.DEFAULT_ALL)'. For me this…