Test; ARGS test rewrite - test GET and POST on phases 1-4 and 2-4 #22
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Sebitosh <soloplayerdiablo@gmail.com>
Merged
airween
approved these changes
Apr 20, 2025
Member
|
Thanks @Sebitosh! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Rewriting of the ARGS test, as discussed by mail.
Because ARGS combines the functionality of ARGS_GET and ARGS_POST, it should be tested by checking it catches arguments in GET requests (phases 1 to 4) and arguments in POST requests (phase 2-4). The actual case written only checks GET arguments in phase 1 and POST arguments in phase 2-4.
Note
For the naming convention of conf files, I chose to keep both files as numbered the same way (ARGS is test case 002), but added
A_GETandB_POSTto signify that those are the different parts, numbered by letter, of the same "test case". We should check if this naming convention suits us.