New unit tests for event

[vubo]

There are new unit tests for all functions in event: event_not_empty, delete_event, get_event_by_id, get_events_ordered_by_name.

I also created a new function event_not_empty in event/services.py based on the #34 and #28 (comment).

[willingc]

Let's remove these comments. It would be better to add a docstring for the test. There should be examples in the Django docs on docstrings.

[vubo]

@willingc yes, I found it: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.5/topics/testing/doctests/
Do you mean the whole function event_not_empty or only # comments ?

[willingc]

@vubo Just the comments please :) As an FYI, it's probably a good idea to use the Django 1.8 docs https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.8/ as the primary resource.

For example,

def event_not_empty(event_id):
    """ Returns true if an event exists and is not empty """

We may wish to revisit the naming of these functions at a later date to improve understanding simply from the function names and it may decrease the number of not statements and double negation. For now, don't worry about it. I'll need to have some additional time to think on this.

Thanks for researching the issue and asking for clarification :)

[willingc]

@vubo Just an FYI, I prefer one line docstrings if the function is straightforward/easily understandable. If it is a complicated function with lots of passed parameters then please use a multi-line docstring. In general, I prefer self documenting code -- less comments and better names :)

[vubo]

@willingc thank you, I will do it. I was confused about this:
"As with unit tests, for a given Django application, the test runner looks for doctests in two places: The models.py file and tests.py" (https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.5/topics/testing/doctests/)
And there is a file services.py

[willingc]

@vubo For now and likely the future, we will only use the docstrings for documentation. We will not use it for the testing function mentioned in your quote above. I'm not a huge fan of doctests ;)

[vubo]

@willingc Ok, I get it :)

[willingc]

Tests pass cleanly. I am going to merge this PR for initial unit tests for event app. These tests will be refactored in a similar fashion as Issue #41.

@vubo Happy to merge 💐