Statistics refactor testcases in async pytest style

[ThomDietrich]

Proposed change

As discussed in #59205 (comment)

Type of change

• Dependency upgrade
• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New integration (thank you!)
• New feature (which adds functionality to an existing integration)
• Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
• Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes Rewrite statistics unittest tests to pytest style test functions #40896
• This PR is related to issue:
• Link to documentation pull request:

Checklist

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
• There is no commented out code in this PR.
• I have followed the development checklist
• The code has been formatted using Black (black --fast homeassistant tests)
• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

• Documentation added/updated for www.home-assistant.io

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:

• The manifest file has all fields filled out correctly.
  Updated and included derived files by running: python3 -m script.hassfest.
• New or updated dependencies have been added to requirements_all.txt.
  Updated by running python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.
• For the updated dependencies - a link to the changelog, or at minimum a diff between library versions is added to the PR description.
• Untested files have been added to .coveragerc.

The integration reached or maintains the following Integration Quality Scale:

• No score or internal
• 🥈 Silver
• 🥇 Gold
• 🏆 Platinum

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

• I have reviewed two other open pull requests in this repository.

[probot-home-assistant]

Hey there @fabaff, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (statistics) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!
_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

[ThomDietrich]

@emontnemery @MartinHjelmare I'm struggling to get the testcases linked to the recorder to work. I suppose I need to use async_wait_recording_done but a recorder instance is needed as parameter and I have no idea how to retrieve it. Any help appreciated!

Please ignore changes to sensor.py! These changes will vanish after #59205 is merged.

[emontnemery]

There's a helper async_wait_recording_done_without_instance, have a look at some tests using that.
Please contact me on discord, emontnemery#6618, if you need some help making the tests run.

[ThomDietrich]

@emontnemery thanks for your help. Ready for review, don't hold back to suggest improvements to the general method

[emontnemery]

Let's try to clean up the excessive use of await hass.async_block_till_done() to make sure we don't hide bugs.
If the tests don't pass unless we call await hass.async_block_till_done() in the loops with state updates there may be something wrong with the statistics sensor.

I commented on the first few occasions, but the pattern seems to be repeated.

Also, please restore the order of the test cases to make the PR easier to review.
Reordering of the tests can be done in a follow-up if that's called for 👍

[ThomDietrich]

Agree. I pretty much inherited these await hass.async_block_till_done() but they are now tided up. Also, I did fix some inconsistent use of async_fire_time_changed to simulate the expiry of values in buffer.

Original order restored, even though that doesn't help GitHub or delta to understand the changes :)

Best!

[emontnemery]

Original order restored, even though that doesn't help GitHub or delta to understand the changes

Thanks a lot! It doesn't help in github, but it helps a lot in external tools.

[emontnemery]

Thanks, @ThomDietrich 👍