5634 new unit tests

[nikzaugg]

This pull request contributes three new test classes with unit tests (as mentioned in #5634 ).

Related Issues

• connects to Create new Unit Tests #5634

Pull Request Checklist

• Unit tests completed
• Integration tests: None
• Deployment requirements, SQL updates, Solr updates, etc.: None
• Documentation completed
• Merged latest from "develop" branch and resolved conflicts

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.07%) to 17.604% when pulling 31f0d38 on nikzaugg:5634-new-unit-tests into 9439313 on IQSS:develop.

[matthew-a-dunlap]

Overall good, one minor request! Thanks for adding coverage!

[matthew-a-dunlap]

I hadn't seen JUnit theories before. They look really powerful and I like how you've used them here. They are experimental though and it looks like JUnit 5 is steering away from this sort of functionality junit-team/junit5#1422 (comment)

I'm ok with accepting this test. Can you leave a comment in the code about this experimentally for us to refer to when we decide to migrate tests? Also maybe a line about Theories in general?

[nikzaugg]

hi @matthew-a-dunlap

Thanks for the review. I added a comment about JUnit Theories in a new commit.

[poikilotherm]

Could this be replaced with the upstream-supported Dynamic Testing in JUnit5?

Promising blog article on that: https://blog.codefx.org/libraries/junit-5-dynamic-tests/

[matthew-a-dunlap]

@poikilotherm This does look really useful! I don't think I'll ask for it in this PR but if we want more dynamic tests this is the way to go.

[djbrooke]

Hi @nikzaugg - is this ready for Code Review?

[nikzaugg]

Hi @djbrooke
Yes, it is ready for review. I added the requested changes with my last commit.

[pdurbin]

Should a new issue be created since #5634 is already closed?

[matthew-a-dunlap]

#5643 is good and ready for QA

[djbrooke]

@pdurbin I'm OK with this moving as a PR. Thanks @matthew-a-dunlap for the code review!