Add a node-tests package #147

kraenhansen · 2025-06-29T19:20:40Z

I want to start running the js-native-api tests (where we bundle in universal polyfills for the Node.js buildins).

changeset-bot · 2025-06-29T19:20:44Z

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 77d261b

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

kraenhansen · 2025-07-24T13:12:57Z

packages/node-tests/rolldown.config.mts

+          delimiters: ["", ""],
+        }
+      ),
+      // Use the babel plugin to transform require statements for addons before they get resolved


Thinking more about it, we might actually be able to do without this if we simply externalize this and replace the __require on that instead 🤔

shirakaba

Not familiar enough to comment further, but some drive-by comments!

shirakaba · 2025-07-24T13:47:11Z

packages/node-tests/package.json

+    "gyp-to-cmake": "gyp-to-cmake ./tests",
+    "build-tests": "tsx scripts/build-tests.mts",
+    "bundle": "rolldown -c rolldown.config.mts",
+    "bootstrap": "npm run copy-tests && npm run gyp-to-cmake && npm run build-tests && npm run bundle"


As long as you don't need pre<script> and post<script>, we can use node --run to avoid the overhead of spinning up npm each time. Should save a good number of milliseconds!

Suggested change

"bootstrap": "npm run copy-tests && npm run gyp-to-cmake && npm run build-tests && npm run bundle"

"bootstrap": "node --run copy-tests && node --run gyp-to-cmake && node --run build-tests && node --run bundle"

TIL - that's great, thanks for sharing 👍 I'm going to use that a lot going forward.

Yagiz made it in response to Bun showing off about their fast script-running. At the time, he estimated npm run as adding an additional 100-200ms of overhead compared to just running the script in Node.js.

https://x.com/yagiznizipli/status/1700901259463577956

More recently, he's said that node --run is 10 times faster as it takes only around 25 ms to run.

https://x.com/yagiznizipli/status/1779200364153065836

shirakaba · 2025-07-24T13:48:06Z

packages/node-tests/common.ts

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+export const buildType = "Release";


Should it be typed like this so that you get appropriate intellisense, or is it really only ever gonna be Release?

Suggested change

export const buildType = "Release";

export const buildType: "Debug" | "Release" = "Release";

For now, we're only testing release builds 🙂 I'll likely revisit that later 👍

shirakaba · 2025-07-24T13:54:08Z

packages/node-tests/scripts/build-tests.mts

+  execSync("cmake-rn", {
+    cwd: projectDirectory,
+    stdio: "inherit",
+  });


Would it make sense to do these as a Promise.all(), or not worth it?

Very likely, once we have more it would be great to not serialize on these 👍

I tried, but it seems to provoke a race-condition on Windows 🤔

Huh, that's unexpected. I don't see any smoking gun at a glance (and I'm pretty sure cmd.exe supports && in commands the same as POSIX shells). The only thing that comes to mind is that, Windows holds some pretty aggressive file locks sometimes.

I'll revisit once we start adding more of these tests 🤞

shirakaba · 2025-07-24T13:54:46Z

packages/node-tests/rolldown.config.mts

+function readGypTargetNames(gypFilePath: string): string[] {
+  const contents = JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync(gypFilePath, "utf-8")) as unknown;
+  assert(
+    typeof contents === "object" && contents !== null,
+    "Expected gyp file to contain a valid JSON object"
+  );
+  assert("targets" in contents, "Expected targets in gyp file");
+  const { targets } = contents;
+  assert(Array.isArray(targets), "Expected targets to be an array");
+  return targets.map(({ target_name }) => {
+    assert(
+      typeof target_name === "string",
+      "Expected target_name to be a string"
+    );
+    return target_name;
+  });
+}


I like the lightweight assertions as usual 👍

shirakaba · 2025-07-24T13:58:09Z

apps/test-app/App.tsx

+      describe(suiteName, () => {
+        for (const [exampleName, requireTest] of Object.entries(examples)) {
+          it(exampleName, requireTest);
+        }
+      });


I'm not sure whether our test runner supports it, but wondering whether we could use describe.each / test.each for better test readouts. I haven't tried before, so no worries if it's not worth it in this case.

paradowstack

My eyes couldn’t spot anything - great progress!

This seemed to be causing issues on Windows

kraenhansen self-assigned this Jun 29, 2025

kraenhansen force-pushed the main branch 4 times, most recently from 90dd405 to 8dac805 Compare July 7, 2025 12:30

kraenhansen mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2025

Implementation of V1 buffer runtime functions #168

Merged

kraenhansen force-pushed the kh/node-tests branch from 176b5ed to 86b42d4 Compare July 14, 2025 15:05

paradowstack mentioned this pull request Jul 16, 2025

Provide a garbage collector tests for buffer runtime functions #182

Open

kraenhansen force-pushed the kh/node-tests branch from 86b42d4 to 375259a Compare July 24, 2025 11:29

kraenhansen added Apple 🍎 Anything related to the Apple platform (iOS, macOS, Cocoapods, Xcode, XCFrameworks, etc.) Android 🤖 Anything related to the Android platform (Gradle, NDK, Android SDK) CI Continuous integration labels Jul 24, 2025

kraenhansen force-pushed the kh/node-tests branch from 375259a to 8c4626c Compare July 24, 2025 11:30

kraenhansen marked this pull request as ready for review July 24, 2025 13:07

kraenhansen commented Jul 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

shirakaba reviewed Jul 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

paradowstack approved these changes Jul 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

vmoroz approved these changes Jul 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

kraenhansen and others added 11 commits July 26, 2025 21:20

Add a node-tests package

53ed809

Rolldown WIP

b5ec2be

Build and bundle node test addons

afca0fd

Run node tests in test app

19b065e

Update copy-tests.mts to use https git url

51734f4

No need to babel transform from rolldown

f1e42c8

Build node-tests in parallel

8d111d1

Add node-api tests to the node repo checkout

e2524c7

Use node --run

89a2e81

Generate entrypoint

5898088

Use fs to derive rolldown config

a011cf0

Revert parallel builds

77d261b

This seemed to be causing issues on Windows

kraenhansen force-pushed the kh/node-tests branch 2 times, most recently from 1fc3431 to 9bf0671 Compare July 30, 2025 17:34

kraenhansen added 2 commits July 30, 2025 19:34

Adopt test app to recursive suite of suites or tests

58a58ca

Ran prettier

8d4c8f2

kraenhansen force-pushed the kh/node-tests branch from 9bf0671 to 8d4c8f2 Compare July 30, 2025 17:34

kraenhansen merged commit 256e7a5 into main Jul 30, 2025
6 checks passed

kraenhansen deleted the kh/node-tests branch July 30, 2025 20:03

	"bootstrap": "npm run copy-tests && npm run gyp-to-cmake && npm run build-tests && npm run bundle"
	"bootstrap": "node --run copy-tests && node --run gyp-to-cmake && node --run build-tests && node --run bundle"

	export const buildType = "Release";
	export const buildType: "Debug" \| "Release" = "Release";

Add a node-tests package #147

Add a node-tests package #147

Uh oh!

Conversation

kraenhansen commented Jun 29, 2025

Uh oh!

changeset-bot bot commented Jun 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

⚠️ No Changeset found

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shirakaba left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kraenhansen Jul 30, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

paradowstack left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

changeset-bot bot commented Jun 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

kraenhansen Jul 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading