execution order difference between jest-jasmine2 and jest-circus

🐛 Bug Report

https://jestjs.io/docs/en/setup-teardown#order-of-execution-of-describe-and-test-blocks manual says execution order of describe and test blocks should be

describe('outer', () => {
  console.log('describe outer-a');

  describe('describe inner 1', () => {
    console.log('describe inner 1');
    test('test 1', () => {
      console.log('test for describe inner 1');
      expect(true).toEqual(true);
    });
  });

  console.log('describe outer-b');

  test('test 1', () => {
    console.log('test for describe outer');
    expect(true).toEqual(true);
  });

  describe('describe inner 2', () => {
    console.log('describe inner 2');
    test('test for describe inner 2', () => {
      console.log('test for describe inner 2');
      expect(false).toEqual(false);
    });
  });

  console.log('describe outer-c');
});

// describe outer-a
// describe inner 1
// describe outer-b
// describe inner 2
// describe outer-c
// test for describe inner 1
// test for describe outer
// test for describe inner 2

while this is true for jest-jasmine2 In jest-circus, it is not work as expected

 PASS  test.js
  outer
    ✓ test 1 (16ms)
    describe inner 1
      ✓ test 1 (3ms)
    describe inner 2
      ✓ test for describe inner 2 (6ms)

  console.log test.js:2
    describe outer-a

  console.log test.js:5
    describe inner 1

  console.log test.js:12
    describe outer-b

  console.log test.js:20
    describe inner 2

  console.log test.js:27
    describe outer-c

  console.log test.js:15
    test for describe outer

  console.log test.js:7
    test for describe inner 1

  console.log test.js:22
    test for describe inner 2

Test Suites: 1 passed, 1 total
Tests:       3 passed, 3 total
Snapshots:   0 total
Time:        2.371s

To Reproduce

Just use same source in manual with jest-jasmine2 or jest-circus

Expected behavior

execution order must be same

Link to repl or repo (highly encouraged)

none

[jeysal]

Currently implementing this, slightly scared by the fact that there seems to be no existing test failing because of it 😄 But maybe it makes sense nobody has written this, we’re probably so used to writing order-independent tests that we don’t even think of any execution order as a requirement.

[vilic]

I would prefer the behavior of jasmine2. In my use case I use describe to organize larger tests that can be split, while the order still matters.

E.g.:

# 1
  # 1.1
    * 1.1.1
    * 1.1.2
  * 1.2
* 2

# for describe and * for test.