add to test coverage #243
add to test coverage #243
Conversation
copied implementations foudn in other navapbc repos
copied implementations found in other navapbc repos
copied implementations found in other navapbc repos
copied implementations found in other navapbc repos
|
@lisac thanks! for testing, could you make these same changes in a PR in https://github.com/navapbc/platform-test-flask so that we can make sure these changes passes CI? |
|
hi @lorenyu ! my apologies, this is my first time working in this repo. |
Co-authored-by: Michael Chouinard <46358556+chouinar@users.noreply.github.com>
| assert_record_match(record, expected_record) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def test_get_addr_info(init_audit_hook, caplog: pytest.LogCaptureFixture): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this test is redundant with test_audit_hook, there's already a use case for socket.getaddrinfo (see
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @mock.patch.dict(os.environ, {"host": "192.123.123.123", "port": "5190"}) | ||
| def test_app_config_sets_values_from_environment(): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm on the fence about including this test and lean somewhat against including this test because it seems like it's kind of retesting pydantic's BaseSettings class. What sort of regression/bug is this test attempting to protect against?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
frankly, i was reacting to the test coverage % on that file. I agree with your point that it's retesting pydantic's implementation. have removed!
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def test_join_list(): | ||
| assert join_list(None) == "" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
out of scope of this PR but why do we even have this function
already covered by a case in test_audit_hook()
3 participants
Ticket
n/a
Changes
Copies over unit tests discovered in other repositories, where the subjects of the tests are functions made available by the template flask application.
Context for reviewers
Testing
navapbc/platform-test-flask#9