If it renders nothing, you can simply assert the following:

expect( wrapper.html() ).toBe( null );

when using enzyme to avoid creating snapshot for such test.

See

This way is promoted by Jest team in their official docs. I personally prefer using enzyme to test React components, but this it might be an easier way in case when you have only snapshot tests in the file. Enzyme is more helpful when doing more complex checks.

Yeah, Enzyme is great for getting into the details. Not sure, how we want to use snapshots etc.

Obsolete comment, should be removed.

It would read better to have explicit value here instead.

That's interesting, it seems like a good idea to test this, too 👍

I kind of disagree with this, I dislike the fact that we export these functions for test purpose. In general if the behavior of these functions is complex enough to deserve a test, it's complex enough to deserve a selector :)

Would using mock stores be preferable?

No, just testing the wrapped component instead and providing the right props. That's what we do for most components.

This test suite is excellent. This is exactly what we need 👍

This comment should be removed.

Ooops. 🙃

Can we move this block to it's own variable to avoid repetition in state?

Can we move those blocks level up and reuse in other tests to avoid code duplication? We can also give them names like headingBlock and paragraphBlock if that is relevant.

I would have to double check, but I am pretty sure that would work.

According to this snapshots 3 tests don't render anything. It would read better to check against null in the test instead.

Yup, I need to look back through this to update.