Skip to content

fix: detect fixture that returns without calling use (#9831) #9861

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
sheremet-va merged 3 commits into from
Mar 16, 2026
+66 −0
Merged

fix: detect fixture that returns without calling use (#9831) #9861

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
81a7c8a
fix: detect fixture that returns without calling `use` (#9831)
oilater Mar 13, 2026
09b3f1c
fix: add stack trace and fixture name to "use not called" error
oilater Mar 16, 2026
04ef793
Merge branch 'main' into fix/9831-fixture-use-error-message
oilater Mar 16, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 9 additions & 0 deletions packages/runner/src/fixture.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -500,6 +500,15 @@ async function resolveFixtureFunction(
await fixtureReturn
})
await useReturnPromise
}).then(() => {
// fixture returned without calling use()
if (!isUseFnArgResolved) {
useFnArgPromise.reject(
new Error(
'Fixture returned without calling "use". Make sure to call "use" in every code path of the fixture function.',
Copy link
Contributor

@hi-ogawa hi-ogawa Mar 16, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can it surface fixture name? For the test case, it would be setup.

EDIT: ah sorry, you've already suggested that #9861 (comment).

Copy link
Contributor Author

@oilater oilater Mar 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, Done in 09b3f1c!

),
)
}
}).catch((e: unknown) => {
// treat fixture setup error as test failure
if (!isUseFnArgResolved) {
Expand Down
20 changes: 20 additions & 0 deletions test/cli/fixtures/fails/test-extend/fixture-without-use.test.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
import { describe, test as base } from 'vitest'

const test = base.extend<{ value: string | undefined, setup: void }>({
value: undefined,

setup: [
async ({ value }, use) => {
if (!value) {
return
}

await use(undefined)
},
{ auto: true },
],
})

describe('fixture returned without calling use', () => {
test('should fail with descriptive error', () => {})
})
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions test/cli/test/__snapshots__/fails.test.ts.snap
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -91,6 +91,8 @@ exports[`should fail test-extend/fixture-rest-props.test.ts 1`] = `"FixtureParse

exports[`should fail test-extend/fixture-without-destructuring.test.ts 1`] = `"FixtureParseError: The 1st argument inside a fixture must use object destructuring pattern, e.g. ({ task } => {}). Instead, received "context"."`;

exports[`should fail test-extend/fixture-without-use.test.ts 1`] = `"Error: Fixture returned without calling "use". Make sure to call "use" in every code path of the fixture function."`;
Copy link
Contributor

@hi-ogawa hi-ogawa Mar 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should favor runInlineTests + stderr snapshot pattern, so we can view full error output (even if we don't have stack right now, it might in the future). Probably we can put it somewhere around

vitest/test/cli/test/scoped-fixtures.test.ts

Lines 22 to 54 in 8fc9cff

test('test fixture cannot import from file fixture', async () => {
const { stderr } = await runInlineTests({
'basic.test.ts': () => {
const extendedTest = it.extend<{
file: string
local: string
}>({
local: ({}, use) => use('local'),
file: [({ local }, use) => use(local), { scope: 'file' }],
})
extendedTest('not working', ({ file: _file }) => {})
},
}, { globals: true })
expect(stderr).toMatchInlineSnapshot(`
"
⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ Failed Suites 1 ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯
FAIL basic.test.ts [ basic.test.ts ]
FixtureDependencyError: The file "file" fixture cannot depend on a test fixture "local".
❯ basic.test.ts:2:27
1| await (() => {
2| const extendedTest = it.extend({
| ^
3| local: ({}, use) => use("local"),
4| file: [({ local }, use) => use(local), { scope: "file" }]
❯ basic.test.ts:8:1
⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯[1/1]⎯
"
`)
})


exports[`should fail test-extend/test-rest-params.test.ts 1`] = `"FixtureParseError: The 1st argument inside a fixture must use object destructuring pattern, e.g. ({ task } => {}). Instead, received "...rest"."`;

exports[`should fail test-extend/test-rest-props.test.ts 1`] = `"FixtureParseError: Rest parameters are not supported in fixtures, received "...rest"."`;
Expand Down
Loading