From 9e18645dad29230b515bafcf7a9481a911a5e54f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Will Hunt <2072976+Half-Shot@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 19:16:23 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] CodeStyle: Add a note about SettingsStore mocks

This has bitten me a number of times and impacts us *all* over the code.
---
 code_style.md | 13 +++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/code_style.md b/code_style.md
index 6e7289d22e..7ccb248689 100644
--- a/code_style.md
+++ b/code_style.md
@@ -364,6 +364,19 @@ Note: We use PostCSS + some plugins to process our styles. It looks like SCSS, b
         });
     });
     ```
+3. When you need to test a feature that relies on SettingsStore values, be sure to tighly scope your mock:
+   ```typescript
+   // BAD - Obscures other settings, not clear which setting is required for test.
+   jest.spyOn(SettingsStore, "getValue").mockReturnValue(false);
+   // GOOD - Passes through other settings to SettingsStore, clear which settings are in use.
+   const realGetValue = SettingsStore.getValue;
+   jest.spyOn(SettingsStore, "getValue").mockImplementation((settingName, ...params) => {
+       if (settingName === "feature_cool_stuff") {
+           return true;
+       }
+       realGetValue(settingName, ...params);
+   });
+   ```
 
 ## Comments