[jest] adding definitions for mocked function

[k-rajat19]

Please fill in this template.

• Use a meaningful title for the pull request. Include the name of the package modified.
• Test the change in your own code. (Compile and run.)
• Add or edit tests to reflect the change.
• Follow the advice from the readme.
• Avoid common mistakes.
• Run npm test <package to test>.

Select one of these and delete the others:
If changing an existing definition:

• Provide a URL to documentation or source code which provides context for the suggested changes: adding ts-jest mock util functions in jest-mock jestjs/jest#12089
• If this PR brings the type definitions up to date with a new version of the JS library, update the version number in the header.

#57716 jestjs/jest#12131

[typescript-bot]

@k-rajat19 Thank you for submitting this PR! I see this is your first time submitting to DefinitelyTyped 👋 — I'm the local bot who will help you through the process of getting things through.

This is a live comment which I will keep updated.

1 package in this PR

• jest — on npm, on unpkg
  • owner-approval: @domdomegg

Code Reviews

Because this is a widely-used package, a DT maintainer will need to review it before it can be merged.

You can test the changes of this PR in the Playground.

Status

• ✅ No merge conflicts
• ✅ Continuous integration tests have passed
• ✅ Most recent commit is approved by a DT maintainer

All of the items on the list are green. To merge, you need to post a comment including the string "Ready to merge" to bring in your changes.

---

Diagnostic Information: What the bot saw about this PR

{
  "type": "info",
  "now": "-",
  "pr_number": 57776,
  "author": "k-rajat19",
  "headCommitOid": "280655bdc093a54452e8d07e30193c6a86d17d55",
  "lastPushDate": "2021-12-22T06:47:01.000Z",
  "lastActivityDate": "2021-12-30T19:30:51.000Z",
  "mergeOfferDate": "2021-12-30T18:25:32.000Z",
  "mergeRequestDate": "2021-12-30T19:30:51.000Z",
  "mergeRequestUser": "k-rajat19",
  "hasMergeConflict": false,
  "isFirstContribution": true,
  "tooManyFiles": false,
  "hugeChange": false,
  "popularityLevel": "Critical",
  "pkgInfo": [
    {
      "name": "jest",
      "kind": "edit",
      "files": [
        {
          "path": "types/jest/index.d.ts",
          "kind": "definition"
        },
        {
          "path": "types/jest/jest-tests.ts",
          "kind": "test"
        }
      ],
      "owners": [
        "NoHomey",
        "jwbay",
        "asvetliakov",
        "alexjoverm",
        "epicallan",
        "ikatyang",
        "wsmd",
        "JamieMason",
        "douglasduteil",
        "ahnpnl",
        "UselessPickles",
        "r3nya",
        "hotell",
        "sebald",
        "andys8",
        "antoinebrault",
        "gstamac",
        "ExE-Boss",
        "quassnoi",
        "Belco90",
        "tonyhallett",
        "ycmjason",
        "devanshj",
        "pawfa",
        "regevbr",
        "gerkindev",
        "domdomegg"
      ],
      "addedOwners": [],
      "deletedOwners": [],
      "popularityLevel": "Critical"
    }
  ],
  "reviews": [
    {
      "type": "approved",
      "reviewer": "orta",
      "date": "2021-12-30T19:03:40.000Z",
      "isMaintainer": true
    },
    {
      "type": "approved",
      "reviewer": "peterblazejewicz",
      "date": "2021-12-30T18:24:55.000Z",
      "isMaintainer": true
    },
    {
      "type": "approved",
      "reviewer": "domdomegg",
      "date": "2021-12-23T18:25:49.000Z",
      "isMaintainer": false
    },
    {
      "type": "approved",
      "reviewer": "G-Rath",
      "date": "2021-12-22T06:57:11.000Z",
      "isMaintainer": false
    }
  ],
  "mainBotCommentID": 997369120,
  "ciResult": "pass"
}

[typescript-bot]

🔔 @NoHomey @jwbay @asvetliakov @alexjoverm @epicallan @ikatyang @wsmd @JamieMason @douglasduteil @ahnpnl @UselessPickles @r3nya @Hotell @sebald @andys8 @antoinebrault @gstamac @ExE-Boss @quassnoi @Belco90 @tonyhallett @ycmjason @devanshj @pawfa @regevbr @GerkinDev @domdomegg — please review this PR in the next few days. Be sure to explicitly select Approve or Request Changes in the GitHub UI so I know what's going on.

[typescript-bot]

@k-rajat19 The CI build failed! Please review the logs for more information.

Once you've pushed the fixes, the build will automatically re-run. Thanks!

Note: builds which are failing do not end up on the list of PRs for the DT maintainers to review.

[G-Rath]

We don't need to define the function ourselves, since it's exported by jest-mock so we can use that which I've done in #57775 - that way we don't have to be maintaining the types ourselves.

[k-rajat19]

@G-Rath as i already worked on it so i am leaving this PR open for review by maintainers of DT . They can close this PR if they want :)

[typescript-bot]

@G-Rath Thank you for reviewing this PR! The author has pushed new commits since your last review. Could you take another look and submit a fresh review?

[G-Rath]

My previous comment still stands

[typescript-bot]

@k-rajat19 One or more reviewers has requested changes. Please address their comments. I'll be back once they sign off or you've pushed new commits. Thank you!

[k-rajat19]

I totally agree with what you have said above. I'm still confused that which is the better way of doing it 😅 (by looking at current scene in @types/jest) that's why I am not closing it.

[k-rajat19]

@SimenB should I close this?

[SimenB]

I'm not involved with maintaining @types/jest, so I have no opinion here.

[G-Rath]

Have requested a few changes, but overall this looks fine - it does introduce some mixed/duplicate types that we should try and resolve ASAP (e.g. jest-mock uses MockWithArgs to type our MockedFunction) but it should be easier to do that with these shipped as-is because codebases can choose which ones to use which'll make it easier to find where they're not compatible with each other.

[G-Rath]

Looks good - have left a couple of tidy up comments but they don't need to be actioned for this to be merged 🙂

[k-rajat19]

Looks good - have left a couple of tidy up comments but they don't need to be actioned for this to be merged )
is this bot merged this PR ?

[typescript-bot]

@G-Rath Thank you for reviewing this PR! The author has pushed new commits since your last review. Could you take another look and submit a fresh review?

[domdomegg]

Thank you @k-rajat19 and @G-Rath for your excellent contributions to this. These changes look good to me now.

As a side note, I'm very impressed by the high quality collaboration between you two, having read through your comments on this and #57775. Keep up the great work! :)

[jameskerr]

Would love to see this merged! Thanks!

[k-rajat19]

ping @orta @sandersn @peterblazejewicz @andrewbranch :)

[peterblazejewicz]

LGTM!

[typescript-bot]

@k-rajat19: Everything looks good here. I am ready to merge this PR (at 280655b) on your behalf whenever you think it's ready.

If you'd like that to happen, please post a comment saying:

Ready to merge

and I'll merge this PR almost instantly. Thanks for helping out! ❤️

(@NoHomey, @jwbay, @asvetliakov, @alexjoverm, @epicallan, @ikatyang, @wsmd, @JamieMason, @douglasduteil, @ahnpnl, @UselessPickles, @r3nya, @Hotell, @sebald, @andys8, @antoinebrault, @gstamac, @ExE-Boss, @quassnoi, @Belco90, @tonyhallett, @ycmjason, @devanshj, @pawfa, @regevbr, @GerkinDev, @domdomegg: you can do this too.)

[orta]

All additions, and looks like what the linked runtime PR indicates - so looks reasonable to me

[k-rajat19]

Ready to merge