[CBR-366] Adding test for partial getters

[paweljakubas]

Description

Adding test for partial getters

Linked issue

https://iohk.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/CBR-366

Type of change

• 🐞 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• 🛠 New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• ⚠️ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• 🏭 Refactoring that does not change existing functionality but does improve things like code readability, structure etc
• 🔨 New or improved tests for existing code
• ⛑ git-flow chore (backport, hotfix, etc)

Developer checklist

• I have read the style guide document, and my code follows the code style of this project.
• If my code deals with exceptions, it follows the guidelines.
• I have updated any documentation accordingly, if needed. Documentation changes can be reflected in opening a PR on cardanodocs.com, amending the inline Haddock comments, any relevant README file or one of the document listed in the docs directory.
• CHANGELOG entry has been added and is linked to the correct PR on GitHub.

Testing checklist

• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

QA Steps

Unit tests:
stack test --ta "-m GetAccountBalance" cardano-sl-wallet-new:wallet-unit-tests
stack test --ta "-m GetAccountAddresses" cardano-sl-wallet-new:wallet-unit-tests
Integration tests:
nix-build release.nix -A tests.walletIntegration

Screenshots (if available)

[edsko]

LGTM, but just to confirm-- did you manage to have an account with a non-zero balance?

[paweljakubas]

yes, in the integration test added the following is taken place:

1. Genesis wallet and random wallet with 5 accounts are created
2. Balances as obtained by getAccounts and by getAccountBalances are compared (here zero balances)
3. Money is transferred from genesis wallet to random wallet's accounts
4. delayThread is adopted to confirm transactions in the blockchain
5. Point 2 is repeated, this time for accounts with nonzero balances

[edsko]

Money is transferred from genesis wallet to random wallet's accounts

You mean in wallet-new/integration/AccountSpecs.hs right?

[paweljakubas]

yes this is the fragment responsible:

let payment amount toAddr = Payment
{ pmtSource = PaymentSource
{ psWalletId = walId genesis
, psAccountIndex = accIndex fromAcct
}
, pmtDestinations = pure PaymentDistribution
{ pdAddress = addrId toAddr
, pdAmount = V1 (Core.mkCoin amount)
}
, pmtGroupingPolicy = Nothing
, pmtSpendingPassword = Nothing
}
amounts <- generate $ shuffle [1..5]
let addrAndAmount = zip (map (\(addr : _) -> addr) $ map accAddresses accs) amounts
forM_ addrAndAmount $ \(addr, amount) ->
postTransaction wc (payment amount addr)

[edsko]

Ok, sounds good. Ideally we'd modify the wallet tests themselves to be able to do something similar, perhaps hook it up to our blockchain infrastructure, but for now, this will do just fine :) Thanks!

[KtorZ]

Thanks @paweljakubas 👍

[KtorZ]

Just a side note but this is a good use-case for >>=. The 4 lines above can be expressed as:

forM_ [1..4] $ \_ -> generate arbitrary >>= postAccount wc (walId wallet)

[KtorZ]

I wonder why 5 accounts and not only one 😄 ?

[KtorZ]

👌

[KtorZ]

^.^ .. That is maybe overkill / redundant with integration tests in the end. I think we can trust Servant here if our handlers function work as expected 😛

[edsko]

I think this is patterned after @adinapoli-iohk 's tests, which do the same.

[KtorZ]

NOT MERGING THIS YET. Wait for #3462 to get in develop