test: Add JS binding tests

[mschfh]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Rust Benchmark

Details

Benchmark suite	Current: b4ff1f7	Previous: cd60a2f	Ratio
rule-match-browserlike/brave-list	2016024231 ns/iter (± 14572407)	2025601114 ns/iter (± 18133232)	1.00
rule-match-first-request/brave-list	1115824 ns/iter (± 12882)	1111325 ns/iter (± 19511)	1.00
blocker_new/brave-list	142217434 ns/iter (± 1798644)	146440968 ns/iter (± 2967288)	0.97
blocker_new/brave-list-deserialize	24593802 ns/iter (± 240537)	24268245 ns/iter (± 287284)	1.01
memory-usage/brave-list-initial	10630445 ns/iter (± 3)	10630445 ns/iter (± 3)	1
memory-usage/brave-list-initial/max	61948094 ns/iter (± 3)	61948094 ns/iter (± 3)	1
memory-usage/brave-list-initial/alloc-count	1030640 ns/iter (± 3)	1030640 ns/iter (± 3)	1
memory-usage/brave-list-1000-requests	2316792 ns/iter (± 3)	2316792 ns/iter (± 3)	1
memory-usage/brave-list-1000-requests/alloc-count	70181 ns/iter (± 3)	70181 ns/iter (± 3)	1
url_cosmetic_resources/brave-list	190273 ns/iter (± 2001)	190467 ns/iter (± 629)	1.00
cosmetic-class-id-match/brave-list	3485800 ns/iter (± 959934)	3480495 ns/iter (± 947856)	1.00

This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️

Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark 'Rust Benchmark'.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 1.10.

Benchmark suite	Current: c559e29	Previous: cd60a2f	Ratio
blocker_new/brave-list-deserialize	36181962 ns/iter (± 1219644)	24268245 ns/iter (± 287284)	1.49

This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.

[antonok-edm]

lgtm with changes

[antonok-edm]

would be good to confirm the rule string matches the original rule added to the list (same for other tests where applicable via filter field)

[atuchin-m]

Thanks for adding these tests.
I would say that the primary tests should be in Rust and here we likely don't want to duplicate tests.

I wonder can we reduce some logic check check in favor of verifing that API works = proxy to the matching rust method).

I.e. $third-party and $1p modifiers looks excessive.

[antonok-edm]

I would say that the primary tests should be in Rust and here we likely don't want to duplicate tests.

I agree that primary tests should be in Rust, but I don't think there's a compelling reason to remove/reduce JS tests - they can help catch regressions or API changes and have very little cost if delegated to agentic coding assistants.

I wonder can we reduce some logic check check in favor of verifing that API works = proxy to the matching rust method).

Definitely agree with this one, but I don't see any easy way of doing it at the moment 🥲