Simplify failure output

[sindresorhus]

With:

import test from 'ava';

test('returns true when happy', t => {
    throw new Error('unicorn');
});

It currently outputs:

❯ ava

  1 failed

  returns true when happy
  Error: unicorn
    Test.fn (test.js:5:8)

I think we should simplify it to:

❯ ava

  1 failed

  returns true when happy
  Error: unicorn
    test.js:5:8

So users can quickly see where the error came from. Test.fn doesn't have any value to the user.

This also applies to the verbose reporter ($ ava --verbose).

We could also use https://github.com/sindresorhus/ansi-escapes#itermsetcwdpath to make the path clickable on iTerm.

[sotojuan]

I can take care of this as I've worked with the reporters before.

[ntwcklng]

Hi, would you mind if i tackle this issue? However, when i run this test i get the following outout:

❯ ./cli.js ava.test.js          

  1 failed

  returns true when happy
  Error: unicorn
    Test.t [as fn] (ava.test.js:4:11)

My outputTest.t [as fn] (ava.test.js:4:11) vs. sindresorhus output: Test.fn (test.js:5:8)

I'm using

❯ node -v
v7.1.0

Maybe the output from the errorstack has changed in node v7?

Responsible for the output:

• https://github.com/avajs/ava/blob/master/lib/reporters/verbose.js#L112
• https://github.com/avajs/ava/blob/master/lib/reporters/mini.js#L184

[sotojuan]

Sure, no problem! Give it a try :D There must've been some changes in 7, I haven't looked yet.

Here's the Node 7 changelog.

[sindresorhus]

@ntwcklng We always appreciate help, but @vdemedes is currently doing a big rewrite of the output, so this would conflict. I would ask you to wait until that work is done or try another issue :)

[ntwcklng]

Okay thanks, i will have a look.

[LasaleFamine]

Hi there, is this still valid?

[sindresorhus]

Only partly. The current output looks like:

❯ ava

  1 failed

  foo
  test.js:24

   23:
   24:   throw new Error('unicorn');
   25: });

  Error: unicorn

  Test.fn (test.js:24:8)

As you can see, the test file and line are shown twice. I think we could simplify it to not show the stack trace if it's only the test function. @avajs/core Thoughts?

[novemberborn]

I think we could simplify it to not show the stack trace if it's only the test function. @avajs/core Thoughts?

👍

[LasaleFamine]

Simplify it to not show the stack trace if it's only the test function.

Can I take this as the issue?

[sindresorhus]

@LasaleFamine Yes :)

[LasaleFamine]

I have a question. Is this related to reporters? The check should be made inside every reporters?

[sindresorhus]

@LasaleFamine Yes, the mini and verbose reporter, but not tap.

[LasaleFamine]

Well, I need some ideas to a good and "self-explained" check. I will make a PR soon though I'm still in WIP.