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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

improve logging test and increase coverage on server.py #1743

Merged
merged 24 commits into from Nov 2, 2022

Conversation

iudeen
Copy link
Contributor

@iudeen iudeen commented Oct 29, 2022

This PR helped me appreciate writing tests and also understand uvicorn even better! 馃榾

tests/middleware/test_logging.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ def _share_socket(sock: socket.SocketType) -> socket.SocketType:
self.servers.append(server)
listeners = sockets

elif config.fd is not None:
elif config.fd is not None: # pragma: py-win32
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add # pragma: py-win32 because we use socket.AF_UNIX in all instances.

Copy link
Sponsor Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, you mean in the line after... Got it. Yep!

@iudeen iudeen changed the title improve uds logging test and increase coverage improve logging test and increase coverage on server.py Nov 1, 2022
@iudeen iudeen requested a review from Kludex November 1, 2022 12:24
tests/middleware/test_logging.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Sponsor Member

@Kludex Kludex left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The initial two tests are fine for this PR. Would you mind creating other PRs for the others?



@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("use_colors", [True, False])
Copy link
Sponsor Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The goal of improving coverage is not to blindly improve it...

It doesn't look like we have a big motivation for creating this test, based on the name it has.

Maybe we can create a test for: "test_port_zero()` or something like that...

Please create another PR for this. 馃憖

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There were no tests for servers that have port 0. That's the reason I had added it. I initially added it in test_main, later decided to check the logs to ensure a port is assigned.

I can move this to another PR and probably rename it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done, I have removed other tests. Will create another PR for those.

@iudeen
Copy link
Contributor Author

iudeen commented Nov 1, 2022

No not at all, I'll do it tomorrow!

Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Marcelo Trylesinski <marcelotryle@gmail.com>
@iudeen iudeen requested a review from Kludex November 2, 2022 18:28
Kludex
Kludex approved these changes Nov 2, 2022
@Kludex Kludex merged commit a901031 into encode:master Nov 2, 2022
15 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants