Node.js Test Runner: A Beginner's Guide

Historically, Node.js lacked an integrated test runner, which forced developers to rely on third-party frameworks such as Jest or Mocha.

This changed when James M. Snell proposed on GitHub that a test runner should be included within Node.js. The proposal developed over time and was eventually merged into the core of Node.js.

As a result, Node version 18 or higher includes a built-in test runner, which removes the need for external testing dependencies.

In this article, you will explore the features of the new test runner along with some examples.

Prerequisites

Before proceeding with this tutorial, ensure that you have a recent version of Node.js installed, preferably the latest LTS.

Step 1 — Setting up the directory

In this section, you'll create a project directory for the Node.js code you'll be testing throughout this tutorial.

To begin, create the directory and move into it with the following command:

mkdir testrunner-demo && cd testrunner-demo

Then, initialize the directory as an npm project:

npm init -y

This command creates a package.json file, which holds essential metadata for your project.

Afterward, run the command below to enable ES Modules in your project:

npm pkg set type="module"

The command adds the type key to your package.json file and sets its value to module:

{
  . . .
  "type": "module"
}

You're now ready to create the Node.js program that you'll be testing. Here's the program in full:

function formatFileSize(sizeBytes) {
  if (sizeBytes === 0) {
    return '0B';
  }
  const sizeName = ['B', 'KB', 'MB', 'GB', 'TB'];
  const i = Math.floor(Math.log(sizeBytes) / Math.log(1024));
  const p = Math.pow(1024, i);
  const s = (sizeBytes / p).toFixed(2);
  return `${s} ${sizeName[i]}`;
}

export { formatFileSize };

import { formatFileSize } from './formatter.js';

if (process.argv.length > 2) {
  const sizeBytes = parseInt(process.argv[2]);
  const formattedSize = formatFileSize(sizeBytes);
  console.log(formattedSize);
} else {
  console.log(
    'Please provide the file size in bytes as a command-line argument.'
  );
}

The above code transforms file sizes from bytes to a more human-readable format, such as KBs, MBs, etc. Save the code in their respective files at your project root, and test it out by providing different inputs:

node index.js 1024

node index.js 1073741824

node index.js 0

Here are the expected results:

1.00 KB
1.00 GB
0B

Now that you understand what needs to be tested, let's move on to the next section where you'll create your first test through the Node.js test runner.

Step 2 — Writing your first test

Unit testing is essential for verifying the accuracy of functions across various scenarios. This validates the functionality and also acts as documentation for future developers.

In the previous section, we discussed what the demo program does and its expected outcomes. Instead of manually verifying these outputs, you will set up unit tests to automate the process.

Start by creating a tests directory in your project's root folder:

mkdir tests

Next, create a file named formatter.test.js within your tests with the following contents:

code tests/formatter.test.js

import { formatFileSize } from "../formatter.js";
import { describe, it } from "node:test";
import assert from "node:assert";

describe("formatFileSize function", () => {
  it('should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824', () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(1073741824), "1.00 GB");
  });
});

Here, the formatFileSize() function is imported along with the testing functions describe and it from node:test, and assert from node:assert.

The describe function wraps your tests into a group called a test suite, where you can define multiple tests. The test, encapsulated by it, asserts whether the actual output from formatFileSize() matches the expected result, "1.00 GB". This automated approach ensures the function works as intended without manually checking each output.

Step 3 — Running your tests

Once you've saved your test file, you're set to run them. To initiate a test with Node's test runner, use the --test flag:

node --test

This command prompts Node.js to search for files that fit specific patterns from the current directory downwards:

• Files with .js, .cjs, or .mjs extensions located in the test or tests directories.
• Any file named "test," regardless of extension, e.g., test.js.
• Files beginning with "test-", e.g., test-feature.cjs.
• Files ending with ".test", "-test", or "_test", e.g., example.test.js, example-test.cjs, example_test.mjs.

By default, each matching file is executed in a separate child process. If the child process finishes with an exit code of 0, the test is considered passing; otherwise, it's considered a failure.

When the tests are executed, the output will look like this:

▶ formatFileSize function
  ✔ should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824 (0.770195ms)
▶ formatFileSize function (4.013289ms)

ℹ tests 1
ℹ suites 1
ℹ pass 1
ℹ fail 0
ℹ cancelled 0
ℹ skipped 0
ℹ todo 0
ℹ duration_ms 112.371317

The output shows that the test suite with one case for the formatFileSize() function ran successfully, verifying it returns "1.00 GB" for 1073741824 bytes without failures, cancellations, or skips. The test took about 112.37 milliseconds to complete.

The test runner uses the TAP output format, which is already widely established in the ecosystem.

Watch Mode

Node.js offers a convenient watch mode that automatically tracks changes in your test files and dependencies. This feature automatically reruns tests when modifications are detected, ensuring your code continues to meet its expected outcomes.

To enable and use watch mode, you can use the following command:

node --test --watch

▶ formatFileSize function
  ✔ should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824 (0.408844ms)
▶ formatFileSize function (2.391008ms)

Step 4 — Testing with test syntax

You've already explored the describe and it syntax for structuring tests, which are widely used. However, Node.js also supports the test syntax if you prefer a different style.

Here's how you can adapt the previous example to use the test syntax:

import { formatFileSize } from '../formatter.js';
import { test } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert';

test('formatFileSize function', (t) => {
  t.test('should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824', () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(1073741824), '1.00 GB');
  });
});

When run, this test produces output similar to the one you got in the previous section:

▶ formatFileSize function
  ✔ should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824 (0.927199ms)
▶ formatFileSize function (3.391822ms)

ℹ tests 2
ℹ suites 0
ℹ pass 2
ℹ fail 0
ℹ cancelled 0
ℹ skipped 0
ℹ todo 0
ℹ duration_ms 92.568164

It's essential to use this syntax carefully, ensuring that the sub tests are constructed using the t.test() method. Using the top-level test() function for subtests will yield an error:

[label tests/formatter.test.js
 . . .
test("formatFileSize function", (t) => {
  test('should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824', () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(1073741824), "1.00 GB");
  });
});

▶ formatFileSize function
  ✖ should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824 (1.286924ms)
    'test did not finish before its parent and was cancelled'

▶ formatFileSize function (2.843585ms)

ℹ tests 2
ℹ suites 0
ℹ pass 0
ℹ fail 1
ℹ cancelled 1
ℹ skipped 0
ℹ todo 0
ℹ duration_ms 71.138765

✖ failing tests:

test at file:/home/ayo/dev/betterstack/demo/testrunner-demo/tests/formatter.test.js:6:3
✖ should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824 (1.286924ms)
  'test did not finish before its parent and was cancelled'

The describe/it syntax is less susceptible to errors like that so we'll continue to prefer that syntax throughout this article for consistency and clarity.

Step 5 — Filtering and limiting tests

In managing a suite of tests, it's common to encounter scenarios where you must filter or limit the execution of specific tests. This allows focused testing on particular files, scenarios, or conditions without running the entire suite each time.

Filtering tests by name

The Node test runner supports test selection using the --test-name-pattern argument. Here's an example:

import { describe, it } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert';
import { formatFileSize } from '../formatter.js';

describe('formatFileSize function', () => {
  it("should return '0B' for sizeBytes = 0", () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(0), '0B');
  });

  it("should return '1.00 MB' for sizeBytes = 1048576", () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(1048576), '1.00 MB');
  });

  it("should return '1.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 1073741824 @large", () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(1073741824), '1.00 GB');
  });

  it("should return '5.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 5368709120 @large", () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(5368709120), '5.00 GB');
  });
});

Note that the @large tag was added to some tests. This tag can be called anything you prefer. To run only the tests marked with @large, use:

node --test --test-name-pattern @large

The output from this command would look like this:

▶ formatFileSize function
  ﹣ should return '0B' for sizeBytes = 0 (0.882616ms) # test name does not match pattern
  ﹣ should return '1.00 MB' for sizeBytes = 1048576 (0.190468ms) # test name does not match pattern
  ✔ should return '1.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 1073741824 @large (0.365786ms)
  ✔ should return '5.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 5368709120 @large (0.187443ms)
▶ formatFileSize function (6.018844ms)

ℹ tests 4
ℹ suites 1
ℹ pass 2
ℹ fail 0
ℹ cancelled 0
ℹ skipped 2
ℹ todo 0
ℹ duration_ms 137.936039

You could also run a specific test by using a uniquely identifying portion of the test name like this:

node --test --test-name-pattern 'sizeBytes = 0'

▶ formatFileSize function
  ✔ should return '0B' for sizeBytes = 0 (0.61673ms)
  ﹣ should return '1.00 MB' for sizeBytes = 1048576 (0.112328ms) # test name does not match pattern
  ﹣ should return '1.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 1073741824 @large (0.099617ms) # test name does not match pattern
  ﹣ should return '5.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 5368709120 @large (0.114415ms) # test name does not match pattern
▶ formatFileSize function (3.244393ms)

. . .

Skipping tests with skip

The Node.js test runner also offers a skip() method for skipping specific tests. It can be used as describe.skip() for skipping an entire suite, or it.skip() for skipping a subtest. You can write it as:

import { describe, it } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert';
import { formatFileSize } from '../formatter.js';

describe('formatFileSize function', () => {
  it.skip("should return '0B' for sizeBytes = 0", () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(0), '0B');
  });

  . . .
});

Or:

import { describe, it } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert';
import { formatFileSize } from '../formatter.js';

describe('formatFileSize function', () => {
  it("should return '0B' for sizeBytes = 0", { skip: true }, () => {
    assert.strictEqual(formatFileSize(0), '0B');
  });

  . . .
});

When run, the output will indicate that one test was skipped, while the others were executed:

▶ formatFileSize function
  ﹣ should return '0B' for sizeBytes = 0 (0.474751ms) # SKIP
  ✔ should return '1.00 MB' for sizeBytes = 1048576 (0.276706ms)
  ✔ should return '1.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 1073741824 @large (0.172765ms)
  ✔ should return '5.00 GB' for sizeBytes = 5368709120 @large (0.147009ms)
▶ formatFileSize function (3.439809ms)

. . .

Step 6 — Implementing mocks

Node.js' test runner features built-in mocking capabilities, which are ideal for testing external APIs, third-party code, or methods. This ensures that your unit tests are stable and not influenced by external factors such as network connectivity or file system changes.

For example, the readFile() method, which reads from the local disk, can be mocked to avoid actual disk reads during tests:

import { describe, it, mock } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert';
import fs from 'node:fs';

// Mocking fs.readFile() method
mock.method(fs.promises, 'readFile', async () => 'Hello World');

describe('Mocking fs.readFile in Node.js', () => {
  it('should successfully read the content of a text file', async () => {
    assert.strictEqual(fs.promises.readFile.mock.calls.length, 0);
    assert.strictEqual(
      await fs.promises.readFile('text-content.txt'),
      'Hello World'
    );
    assert.strictEqual(fs.promises.readFile.mock.calls.length, 1);

    // Reset the globally tracked mocks.
    mock.reset();
  });
});

This example uses mock.method() to substitute the real fs.promises.readFile() with a mock function that returns Hello World.

The test checks that the mock function behaves as expected, ensuring it's called correctly and produces the right output. After the test, mock.reset() is used to clear any globally tracked mock data, maintaining test isolation.

Upon execution, this test setup would generate the following output:

▶ Mocking fs.readFile in Node.js
  ✔ should successfully read the content of a text file (0.566754ms)
▶ Mocking fs.readFile in Node.js (3.307336ms)

. . .

Mocking timers

In Node.js v20.4.0, a MockTimers API was introduced to allow for the simulation of time-related functions such as setTimeout() and setInterval().

Here's how to use this feature with mock.timers.enable():

import { describe, it, mock } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert/strict';

describe('Mocking setTimeout in Node.js', () => {
  it('should successfully mock setTimeout', () => {
    const fn = mock.fn();
    mock.timers.enable({ apis: ['setTimeout'] });
    setTimeout(fn, 20);

    mock.timers.tick(10);
    mock.timers.tick(10);

    assert.strictEqual(fn.mock.callCount(), 1);
  });
});

In this example, setTimeout is overridden to test its behavior without waiting for real time to pass. The test initiates a timeout to execute a function after 20 milliseconds, then advances the clock in two 10-millisecond steps.

Even though the total time simulated matches the timeout duration, the function is only deemed to have been called once due to the mock setup. This method provides a precise way to test time-dependent code without actual delay.

When run, the output resembles the following:

node:2641257) ExperimentalWarning: The MockTimers API is an experimental feature and might change at any time
(Use `node --trace-warnings ...` to show where the warning was created)
▶ Mocking setTimeout in Node.js
  ✔ should successfully mock setTimeout (1.156348ms)
▶ Mocking setTimeout in Node.js (2.780952ms)

. . .

You can also use the MockTimers API to simulate and control the behavior of the Date object, which is incredibly useful for testing functionalities that are dependent on time, such as Date.now().

The following example shows how to mock the Date object using this API:

import assert from 'node:assert';
import { describe, it, test } from 'node:test';

describe('Mocking the Date object in Node.js', () => {
  it('should effectively mock the Date object starting from 200 milliseconds', (context) => {
    context.mock.timers.enable({ apis: ['Date'], now: 200 });
    assert.strictEqual(Date.now(), 200);

    // Simulate advancing time by 200 milliseconds
    context.mock.timers.tick(200);
    assert.strictEqual(Date.now(), 400);
  });
});

In this example, the Date object's initial time is 200 milliseconds. The test verifies that Date.now() initially matches this mock setup. It then progresses time by 200 milliseconds using context.mock.timers.tick(200), and confirms that Date.now() updates accordingly to 400 milliseconds.

When run, the output looks similar to this:

(node:2644346) ExperimentalWarning: The MockTimers API is an experimental feature and might change at any time
(Use `node --trace-warnings ...` to show where the warning was created)
▶ Mocking the Date object in Node.js
  ✔ should effectively mock the Date object starting from 200 milliseconds (1.496926ms)
▶ Mocking the Date object in Node.js (4.26249ms)

. . .

Step 7 — Using test hooks for setup and teardown tasks

Another useful feature offered by the test runner is hooks, commonly used for setup and teardown tasks. Setup involves configuring the environment for the test, while teardown revolves around cleaning or resetting anything set up during the setup phase.

The following hooks are provided:

• before: This hook runs once before any tests execute. It's often used to set up the environment, such as establishing a connection to the database or loading fixtures.
• beforeEach(): This hook runs before each test in a suite. It helps set up necessary things for each test, such as initializing objects or test data.
• after(): This hook runs after the entire test suite. It can be used to clean up resources, like closing database connections.
• afterEach(): This hook executes code after each test case.

In the previous section on mocking, you saw an example of mocking a method using mock.method and resetting the mocks. Similar techniques can be used with hooks, as demonstrated below:

import { describe, it, mock, beforeEach, afterEach } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert';
import fs from 'node:fs';

describe('Mocking fs.readFile in Node.js', () => {
  beforeEach(() => {
    // Set up mocks or any necessary setup before each test
    mock.method(fs.promises, 'readFile', async () => 'Hello World');
  });

  afterEach(() => {
    // Clean up mocks or any other resources after each test
    mock.reset();
  });

  it('should successfully read the content of a text file', async () => {
    assert.strictEqual(fs.promises.readFile.mock.calls.length, 0);
    assert.strictEqual(
      await fs.promises.readFile('text-content.txt'),
      'Hello World'
    );
    assert.strictEqual(fs.promises.readFile.mock.calls.length, 1);
  });
});

Here, fs.readFile() method is mocked before each test in the beforeEach() hook and reset in the afterEach() to ensure subsequent tests start with a clean state. This approach helps avoid issues caused by shared state between tests.

After running the tests, you will see output like this:

▶ Mocking fs.readFile in Node.js
  ✔ should successfully read the content of a text file (1.186674ms)
▶ Mocking fs.readFile in Node.js (2.618802ms)

. . .

Step 9 — Measuring code coverage

The Node.js test runner includes an experimental feature for tracking code coverage, which is enabled using the --experimental-test-coverage flag. This provides a detailed summary of how much of your program is exercised by your tests, a valuable metric for understanding test effectiveness.

To gather code coverage, use the following command:

node --test --experimental-test-coverage

The relevant part of the report is shown below:

. . .
ℹ start of coverage report
ℹ ------------------------------------------------------------------------
ℹ file                    | line % | branch % | funcs % | uncovered lines
ℹ ------------------------------------------------------------------------
ℹ formatter.js            |  83.33 |    66.67 |  100.00 | 3-4
ℹ tests/formatter.test.js |  95.24 |   100.00 |   80.00 | 7
ℹ tests/index.test.js     | 100.00 |   100.00 |  100.00 |
ℹ ------------------------------------------------------------------------
ℹ all files               |  94.74 |    92.86 |   90.91 |
ℹ ------------------------------------------------------------------------
ℹ end of coverage report

The coverage report indicates code coverage percentages for the project: the formatter.js file has 83.33% line coverage, 66.67% branch coverage, and 100% function coverage, with lines 3-4 uncovered.

Additionally, Node.js allows for selective disabling of code coverage analysis for particular code sections. This is useful for parts of the code that are platform-specific or otherwise challenging to test. You can disable and then re-enable coverage analysis like this:

/* node:coverage disable */
if (anAlwaysFalseCondition) {
  console.log('this is never executed');
}
/* node:coverage enable */

With these comments, the code coverage tool will ignore the enclosed code block during its analysis. This functionality helps maintain the accuracy of your coverage metrics by excluding sections that do not contribute to your application's functionality or are impractical to test.

Step 10 — Generating test reports

The Node.js test runner supports generating detailed test reports, which are invaluable for analysis, spotting trends, and maintaining documentation of test results. You can specify the format of these reports using the --test-reporter flag.

Supported reporter formats include:

• TAP (Test Anything Protocol): This format is versatile and can be used with other tools that parse TAP output.
• Spec: Provides a descriptive output that's easy to read directly in your terminal.
• Dot: Displays a minimalist dot matrix, where each dot represents a test.
• JUnit: Generates XML reports that can be integrated with continuous integration tools and other systems that consume JUnit-compatible formats.

To generate a TAP format report:

node --test --test-reporter tap

TAP version 13
# Subtest: formatFileSize function
    # Subtest: should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824
    ok 1 - should return "1.00 GB" for sizeBytes = 1073741824
      ---
      duration_ms: 0.66647
      ...
    1..1
ok 1 - formatFileSize function
  ---
  duration_ms: 4.305755
  type: 'suite'
  ...
1..1
# tests 1
# suites 1
# pass 1
# fail 0
# cancelled 0
# skipped 0
# todo 0

For a Spec format report, use:

node --test --test-reporter spec

You can also direct the output of these reports to a file, which is particularly useful for archival or integration with other tools. For example, to save a TAP report to a file:

node --test --test-reporter tap --test-reporter-destination report.txt

This command generates a report.txt file containing the TAP formatted report.

Step 11 — Writing a basic server test

This section will demonstrate how to write a basic test for a Node.js server. We'll utilize Fastify here, but this approach can also be adapted for other similar web frameworks.

First, add Fastify to your project using npm:

npm install fastify

Next, set up a basic Fastify server in project root:

import Fastify from 'fastify';

function buildFastify() {
  const fastify = Fastify();

  fastify.get('/', function (request, reply) {
    reply.send({ hello: 'world' });
  });

  return fastify;
}

export default buildFastify;

The above code defines a single route that returns a JSON object when visited. Now, let's write tests to ensure our Fastify application behaves as expected:

import { describe, it, before, after } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert';
import buildApp from '../app.js';

describe('GET /', () => {
  let app;

  before(async () => {
    app = await buildApp();
  });

  after(async () => {
    await app.close();
  });

  it('returns status 200', async () => {
    const response = await app.inject({
      url: '/',
    });
    assert.deepStrictEqual(response.statusCode, 200);
    assert.strictEqual(
      response.headers['content-type'],
      'application/json; charset=utf-8'
    );
    assert.deepEqual(JSON.parse(response.payload), { hello: 'world' });
  });
});

In our testing setup, the before hook initializes the Fastify application to ensure it's ready for testing, while the after hook closes the server to release resources.

The it block evaluates the application's response, checking for a 200 status code, correct content type, and expected JSON output, thus ensuring each test is conducted under optimal conditions for precise results.

Execute the server test using the Node test runner:

node --test tests/app.test.js

▶ GET /
  ✔ returns status 200 (10.716153ms)
▶ GET / (25.512059ms)

. . .

This testing setup provides a reliable method for ensuring your Fastify applications function correctly in a controlled environment using the Node test runner.

Final thoughts

This article offers a detailed guide on using the Node.js test runner to create and execute tests. It highlights features like mocking, code coverage analysis, and report generation, which are essential for assessing test effectiveness.

For additional details, please visit the documentation page. If you're interested in how the Node.js test runner compares to other testing frameworks, check out our comparison guide.

Thanks for reading!

Article by

Stanley Ulili

Stanley Ulili is a technical educator at Better Stack based in Malawi. He specializes in backend development and has freelanced for platforms like DigitalOcean, LogRocket, and AppSignal. Stanley is passionate about making complex topics accessible to developers.

Got an article suggestion? Let us know

Next article

Load Testing Node.js with Artillery: A Beginner's Guide

Observability and monitoring reveals problems, but load testing with Artillery can help you find them before they happen.

→

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.