npm package discovery and stats viewer.

Discover Tips

  • General search

    [free text search, go nuts!]

  • Package details

    pkg:[package-name]

  • User packages

    @[username]

Sponsor

Optimize Toolset

I’ve always been into building performant and accessible sites, but lately I’ve been taking it extremely seriously. So much so that I’ve been building a tool to help me optimize and monitor the sites that I build to make sure that I’m making an attempt to offer the best experience to those who visit them. If you’re into performant, accessible and SEO friendly sites, you might like it too! You can check it out at Optimize Toolset.

About

Hi, 👋, I’m Ryan Hefner  and I built this site for me, and you! The goal of this site was to provide an easy way for me to check the stats on my npm packages, both for prioritizing issues and updates, and to give me a little kick in the pants to keep up on stuff.

As I was building it, I realized that I was actually using the tool to build the tool, and figured I might as well put this out there and hopefully others will find it to be a fast and useful way to search and browse npm packages as I have.

If you’re interested in other things I’m working on, follow me on Twitter or check out the open source projects I’ve been publishing on GitHub.

I am also working on a Twitter bot for this site to tweet the most popular, newest, random packages from npm. Please follow that account now and it will start sending out packages soon–ish.

Open Software & Tools

This site wouldn’t be possible without the immense generosity and tireless efforts from the people who make contributions to the world and share their work via open source initiatives. Thank you 🙏

© 2024 – Pkg Stats / Ryan Hefner

vitest-webextension-mock

v0.0.7

Published

Mock webextension APIs with vitest functions

Downloads

486

Readme

vitest-webextension-mock

npm version Code coverage

Questions

What should we do with the differences between the specs and the chrome implementation?
For an example, according to the spec, browser.action.setTitle should take

setTitle({title: string, windowId: number, tabId: number})

according to the specs (MDN), but the chrome implementation is (docs):

setTitle({title: string, tabId: number}, callback: Function)

What should we do in such cases?

  • Offer a way for consumers to configure which flavour of the API they want to use?
  • Only do chrome flavour? Only do official spec flavour?

We should for sure look at webextension-polyfill which solves this problem and follow what they do (which is most likely following the spec)

TODO

  • [ ] Make extension URL configurable so consumers can control the path returned by browser.runtime.getURL()
    • [ ] Make browser configurable so it changes the scheme chrome-extension:// or moz-extension://
    • [ ] Allow user to provide extension ID

Docs

The mock functions will try to emulate browser behavior as best they can. For an example:

browser.action.getTitle({windowId: 1, tabId: 1}) 

Will return an error because according to the specs, if both windowId and tabId are supplied, getTitle should return an error.

However, we rely on typescript for parameters null checks:

browser.action.getTitle()

is an invalid call as getTitle expects 1 parameter. The mocked function will not throw if called without a parameter. We recommend you use typescript with @types/webextension-polyfill to catch these errors at build time.