Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

refactor: change basic test to suite #437

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Jul 5, 2024
Merged

Conversation

sysrex
Copy link
Contributor

@sysrex sysrex commented Jun 10, 2024

Change tests to test suite.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor

    • Improved test logic and structure for better instance management and context handling.
    • Introduced a TestSuite struct for organized test setup and cleanup.
  • Style

    • Adjusted import order in main_test.go for better readability and organization.
  • New Features

    • Added a new test suite setup file suite_setup_test.go to streamline the testing process.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 10, 2024

Walkthrough

The refactoring of the basic_test.go file centers around converting the test logic into a TestSuite struct to streamline instance management. This includes handling setup and cleanup within the newly introduced suite_setup_test.go. The modifications improve code readability, manage instances more cleanly, and leverage context handling improvements.

Changes

File Change Summary
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Refactored TestBasic function into TestSuite, adjusted instance creation/handling, enhanced context use.
e2e/basic/main_test.go Adjusted import order for better readability.
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Introduced TestSuite struct, SetupSuite and TearDownSuite methods for test setup and cleanup.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Tester
    participant TestSuite
    participant Knuu

    Tester->>TestSuite: Run TestRunSuite
    TestSuite->>Knuu: SetupSuite
    TestSuite->>Tester: Call TestBasic
    Tester->>Knuu: NewInstance("alpine")
    Knuu->>Tester: Return instance
    Tester->>Tester: Run instance commands
    Tester->>TestSuite: Cleanup
    TestSuite->>Knuu: TearDownSuite
Loading

Poem

In lines of code, a change so bright,
New structures form, from day to night.
Instances now, in suites do dwell,
With ease they rise, with ease they fell.
Context flows, seamless as streams,
Improved tests, like coder's dreams. 🌟


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 3

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5b65065 and 88f8d54.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (1 hunks)
Additional context used
golangci-lint
e2e/basic/basic_test.go

6-6: File is not goimports-ed with -local github.com/celestiaorg (goimports)

Additional comments not posted (3)
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (2)

13-16: The Suite struct is well-defined and integrates seamlessly with the test suite functionality.


39-41: The TestRunSuite function is correctly implemented to run the test suite.

e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1)

10-11: The constant TestImage is well-defined and appropriately used in the test setup.

e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@MSevey
Copy link
Member

MSevey commented Jun 10, 2024

golangci-lint errors can be fixed by running make fmt

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 88f8d54 and d3175f3.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go
Additional comments not posted (3)
e2e/basic/basic_test.go (3)

15-57: Refactor to test suite structure enhances modularity and maintainability.

The transition to a test suite structure centralizes setup, execution, and cleanup, which is a good practice for complex testing scenarios. This change should make the tests easier to manage and extend.


45-57: Consider dynamically generating test cases to enhance flexibility.
[REFACTOR_SUGGESTion]

-	tt := []testCase{
-		{"Hello World"},
-	}
+	tt := generateTestCases()

+	func generateTestCases() []testCase {
+		return []testCase{
+			{"Hello World"},
+			// Add more test cases as needed
+		}
+	}

Dynamically generating test cases as suggested in a previous review can enhance the flexibility and maintainability of the test suite. This allows easy addition of new test cases without modifying the core test logic.


21-22: Ensure proper context management and error handling.

The use of context.Background() and s.Require().NoError for error handling is appropriate here, but ensure that all asynchronous operations properly handle the context to avoid potential leaks or unresponsive goroutines.

Also applies to: 24-26, 37-38

refactor: Change the Test suite for Basic for the time being without proxy and add more test cases
@sysrex sysrex force-pushed the sysrex/386_refactor_e2e_tests branch from ea93967 to 04e5db3 Compare June 10, 2024 21:13
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 3

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between d3175f3 and 04e5db3.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go
Additional comments not posted (2)
e2e/basic/basic_test.go (2)

12-12: Ensure the constant TestImage is used consistently throughout the test suite.


21-22: Enhanced error handling using s.Require().NoError for critical operations.

  • This ensures that the test fails immediately if an essential operation encounters an error, which is a good practice in test design.

Also applies to: 24-26, 37-38, 53-54, 56-56

e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mojtaba-esk
mojtaba-esk previously approved these changes Jun 11, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@mojtaba-esk mojtaba-esk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great job. Overall everything went very well. Left some suggestion comments.

e2e/basic/main_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 4

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 04e5db3 and 645c2b4.

Files selected for processing (4)
  • e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/main_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/probe_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (1 hunks)
Files not summarized due to errors (1)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go: Error: Server error. Please try again later.
Additional context used
golangci-lint
e2e/basic/basic_test.go

1-1: : # github.com/celestiaorg/knuu/e2e/basic [github.com/celestiaorg/knuu/e2e/basic.test]
e2e/basic/probe_test.go:90:31: syntax error: unexpected {, expected (
e2e/basic/probe_test.go:91:5: syntax error: unexpected ( in parameter list; possibly missing comma or ) (typecheck)

e2e/basic/probe_test.go

90-90: expected '(', found '{' (typecheck)


91-91: missing ',' in parameter list (typecheck)


95-95: expected declaration, found 'if' (typecheck)

GitHub Check: test (./e2e/basic, 15m)
e2e/basic/probe_test.go

[failure] 90-90:
expected '(', found '{'

GitHub Check: golangci-lint
e2e/basic/probe_test.go

[failure] 90-90:
syntax error: unexpected {, expected (


[failure] 91-91:
syntax error: unexpected ( in parameter list; possibly missing comma or ) (typecheck)


[failure] 90-90:
expected '(', found '{' (typecheck)


[failure] 91-91:
missing ',' in parameter list (typecheck)


[failure] 95-95:
expected declaration, found 'if' (typecheck)

Additional comments not posted (3)
e2e/basic/main_test.go (1)

7-12: The function convertViaMap is implemented correctly and efficiently using a map.

e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (2)

13-16: The TestSuite struct is well-defined and appropriately encapsulates the necessary fields for the test suite.


18-26: The SetupSuite function is correctly implemented with proper error handling and initialization logic.

e2e/basic/main_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/probe_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
smuu
smuu previously approved these changes Jun 11, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 2

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1)

12-12: Consider renaming testImage to a more specific name.

Given that testImage is accessible package-wide, a more specific name would help avoid potential conflicts or confusion with other tests in the package.

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 645c2b4 and 486d503.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/main_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • e2e/basic/main_test.go
Additional comments not posted (1)
e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1)

15-56: Refactor TestBasic to use the TestSuite structure.

The refactoring of TestBasic into a method of the TestSuite struct is well-implemented. This change centralizes setup, execution, and cleanup, improving maintainability and readability. Ensure that all instances where TestBasic was previously called are updated to accommodate the new method signature.

e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@MSevey
Copy link
Member

MSevey commented Jun 11, 2024

@coderabbitai resolve

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 11, 2024

Actions performed

Comments resolved.

MSevey
MSevey previously requested changes Jun 11, 2024
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/basic_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/main_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@smuu smuu removed the request for review from aWN4Y25pa2EK July 5, 2024 08:10
tty47
tty47 previously approved these changes Jul 5, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@tty47 tty47 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🔥

@mojtaba-esk mojtaba-esk dismissed stale reviews from tty47 and smuu via 1f30791 July 5, 2024 08:12
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 3

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 486d503 and 1f30791.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (2)
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (2)

18-26: LGTM!

The SetupSuite function is well-structured and correctly initializes the knuu.Knuu instance.


38-40: LGTM!

The TestRunSuite function is straightforward and correctly runs the test suite.

e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1f30791 and ff8201b.

Files selected for processing (3)
  • e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/main_test.go (1 hunks)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • e2e/basic/suite_setup_test.go
Additional context used
golangci-lint
e2e/basic/main_test.go

7-7: File is not goimports-ed with -local github.com/celestiaorg

(goimports)

Additional comments not posted (3)
e2e/basic/main_test.go (2)

8-8: Approved: Import order adjustment.

The import order adjustment ensures proper dependency management.


Line range hint 10-16:
Note: Future removal of TestMain function.

The TestMain function will be removed in another PR as per previous review comments.

Tools
golangci-lint

7-7: File is not goimports-ed with -local github.com/celestiaorg

(goimports)

e2e/basic/basic_test.go (1)

4-8: Approved: Refactoring changes.

The refactoring to use the TestSuite struct centralizes setup, execution, and cleanup, improving maintainability and readability.

e2e/basic/basic_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@smuu smuu merged commit 6f81e52 into main Jul 5, 2024
4 of 9 checks passed
@smuu smuu deleted the sysrex/386_refactor_e2e_tests branch July 5, 2024 09:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants