testr: merge testLogger and testLoggerInterface #148
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Timon Wong <timon86.wang@gmail.com>
| @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ type testlogger struct { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func (l testlogger) GetUnderlying() *testing.T { | |||
| return l.t.(*testing.T) | |||
| return l.t.(*testing.T) //nolint:forcetypeassert | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That something like this would be needed was the main reason for having two separate implementations.
But I think it's okay and worth the reduction in code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't get it - if we can make this assumption, then what value is the interface-based version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At the API level, both versions are type-safe and only deal with testing.T resp. TestingT. The implementation of testlogger then reuses the interface-based version and therefore only has a l.t of type TestingT here although all that ever gets stored here is the testing.T pointer. Therefore the typecast is necessary and safe.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could call NewWithInterface() with something that ISN'T a testing.T, right? Then this will panic. What am I missing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was added so that we could pass a testing.B
There was a problem hiding this comment.
NewWithInterface() returns a testloggerInterface and thus doesn't have this testlogger.GetUnderlying.
Only New(t *testing.T) and NewWithOptions(t *testing.T, opts Options) return a testlogger instance.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree that this is non-obvious. Perhaps it is better to keep the two implementations completely separate, despite the code duplication? Or add more code comments?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ahhhhhh I see. Yeah, a comment here like:
// This method is defined on testlogger, so the only type this could possibly be is testing.T
| @@ -116,36 +112,11 @@ func logError(t TestingT, formatError func(error, string, []interface{}) (string | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| type testlogger struct { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As per the below discussion, we should comment here that this exists to wrap and modify the method-set of testloggerInterface, in particular it changes the GetUnderlying() method
| @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ type testlogger struct { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func (l testlogger) GetUnderlying() *testing.T { | |||
| return l.t.(*testing.T) | |||
| return l.t.(*testing.T) //nolint:forcetypeassert | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ahhhhhh I see. Yeah, a comment here like:
// This method is defined on testlogger, so the only type this could possibly be is testing.T
|
Ping - any desire to finish this? |
|
Hi @timonwong I'd like to maybe tag a release in the near future, and I'd like to see this in there. If you don't plan to finish it, do you object if I take it over? |
No description provided.