Any more thoughts on this? I'd be happy to attempt a PR to add this option if there's is no opposition and it's just a matter of prioritizing it.

I'll start working on a PR

Any chance we could get some eyes from a maintainer on the pull request for this issue? It's been sitting there for a while and it would be nice to have this support for testing hooks in libraries like enzyme. Thanks!

This feature is vital for us to be able to move over to some of these newer paradigms in React. Is there anything we can do to help bump this ticket for visibility?

Likewise this is a big deal. Hooks support on shallow rendering is crucial.

I hope this get done soon. We would like to use hooks.

This feature is crucial. As my whole project only uses hooks, I can test none of useEffect functions with Enzyme.

Could this issue be assigned to someone?

@nagman Consider it assigned to me! I've opened a PR with the feature fully implemented. I'm happy to do whatever it takes to get this merged if a maintainer can make time to review it.

Might also be worth up-voting my PR here: #16168 might get it more visibility with the react maintainers.

Any updates on when this PR would get assigned and merged in? Really need Hooks fully supported for Enzyme Shallow Rendering.

@thedanchez Facebook won't support shallow rendering the their shallow renderer anymore so they won't merge my PR or any others relating to that area. Don't think it's pragmatic given the work is already there. They offered to move the shallow renderer into its own package and hand over maintenance, but when we asked a few questions relating to how this would happen, they went back into ignore mode.

@ohjames - Can you link me to a source for that discontinued support for shallow rendering?

@Sonic12040 #16168 (comment)

I'm trying to keep that issue thread active by checking in on a weekly basis. I really think this feature needs to be added ASAP.

Don't know what's keeping them from handing ownership of react-shallow-renderer over to Airbnb or to the community at larger sooner rather than later.

Thanks for keeping that active! I'm sure given the number of tickets they must receive (internal and external), that it might be some time before they can migrate a section of the code out.

@thedanchez the shallow renderer uses a bunch of methods in the shared folder that aren't exported by react. We asked them about it but they stopped responding. You're probably better off giving up on the shallow renderer at this point, Facebook don't care to maintain anything that isn't useful to Facebook and are clearly too busy to respond to anything not in their own interests. They say shallow renderer encourages brittle tests. They didn't give justification but they believe it. People in the PR thread gave arguments with good justifications against this but they aren't listening.

@thedanchez BTW enzyme isn't maintained by Airbnb anymore, mostly by a single develop who used to work at Airbnb. I doubt Airbnb would be interested in maintaining the shallow renderer.

@ohjames oh man, I overlooked that detail. As far as shallow rendering based testing goes, what do you guys think is the best course of action for those who are using React Hooks in their components? I'd really like to avoid having to do a full mount in testing...

@tsolman This explains how to unsubscribe from issue notifications.

@thedanchez The viable and supported alternative right now is to test with a full mount and use something like jest mocks to prevent nested components from rendering. The react-testing-library FAQ has an example of mimicking shallow rendering with this technique but I dislike how all nested components need to be mocked manually.

If anyone knows of a way to automatically mock all nested components but not the component under test, please let me know. I've been looking into implementing something like that, including support for "unwrapping" HOCs.

While this is solved, here's a workaround:

// index.tsx
import React from 'react';

export const Component: React.FunctionComponent = () => {
  React.useEffect(() => {
    console.log('Rawr!');
  }, []);

  return <>{'🦕'}</>;
};

// index.test.tsx
import React from 'react';
import { shallow } from 'enzyme';

import { Component } from './index';

jest.spyOn(React, 'useEffect').mockImplementation(f => f());
console.log = jest.fn();

describe(`Component`, () => {
  it('should greet on mount', () => {
    shallow(<Component />);
    expect(console.log).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
  });
});

Unfortunately, I think the only way forward is to use mount(), but that doesn't mean you need to do a "full mount" of all subcomponents. Tests can still mock sub-components so that they're rendered with a mock, e.g.

jest.mock("./mySubComponent", () => () => "MySubComponent");

If the above mocked item needs to be referenced in tests, it needs to be imported (and will then get mocked by above), and can then be referenced by with the import name, e.g.

import MySubComponent from "./mySubComponent";
...
...
const findComponent = wrapper.find(MySubComponent);

Hi,
is it an active issue ?

Any update on this please?

I want this :-)

Not sure if you all are aware on this thread, but this topic of discussion has been going on in another GitHub thread: #17321

I'm going to close this issue in favor of the other one linked above.