Skip to content

Conversation

@jan-janssen
Copy link
Member

@jan-janssen jan-janssen commented Aug 2, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Added new tests to verify the default behavior of abstract methods in queue adapter and scheduler command classes.
    • Ensured that abstract methods can be instantiated and return expected default values without raising exceptions.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Aug 2, 2025

Walkthrough

Two new test modules have been added. The first tests the abstract methods of QueueAdapterAbstractClass by patching its __abstractmethods__ to allow instantiation, then asserting that each abstract method returns None. The second introduces similar tests for the SchedulerCommands abstract class, confirming that its abstract methods also return None.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Change Summary
Abstract Class Adapter Tests
tests/test_abstract.py
Introduces TestQueueAdapterAbstractClass to test instantiation and default return values of abstract methods in QueueAdapterAbstractClass by patching __abstractmethods__.
Abstract Scheduler Commands Tests
tests/test_scheduler_commands.py
Adds TestAbstractSchedulerCommands to test that abstract methods in SchedulerCommands return None when instantiated via patching. No changes to existing tests.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant TestCase
    participant AbstractClass
    TestCase->>AbstractClass: Patch __abstractmethods__ to empty set
    TestCase->>AbstractClass: Instantiate class
    TestCase->>AbstractClass: Call abstract method
    AbstractClass-->>TestCase: Return None
Loading

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Poem

In a warren of tests, the rabbits convene,
Patching abstracts to make methods seen.
They hop through the code, check None with delight,
Ensuring the base class behaves just right.
With every test passing, their whiskers twitch—
Abstract assurance, a bug-free niche! 🐇✨

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch abstract_tests

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@jan-janssen jan-janssen closed this Aug 2, 2025
@jan-janssen jan-janssen reopened this Aug 2, 2025
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 702c253 and 766653d.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • tests/test_abstract.py (1 hunks)
  • tests/test_scheduler_commands.py (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code Graph Analysis (1)
tests/test_abstract.py (1)
pysqa/base/abstract.py (1)
  • QueueAdapterAbstractClass (8-80)
🪛 Ruff (0.12.2)
tests/test_scheduler_commands.py

23-23: Redefinition of unused test_submit_job_command from line 19

(F811)


27-27: Redefinition of unused test_submit_job_command from line 23

(F811)

🔇 Additional comments (4)
tests/test_abstract.py (3)

1-4: LGTM!

Clean and appropriate imports for testing abstract classes.


6-6: LGTM!

Standard unittest test class declaration.


7-33: Excellent approach to testing abstract class methods!

The use of @patch.multiple to clear __abstractmethods__ is a clever way to enable instantiation of abstract classes for testing. Each test method properly verifies that the abstract methods return None by default, which aligns with the abstract class implementation where methods contain only pass statements.

The test coverage is comprehensive, covering all abstract methods from QueueAdapterAbstractClass with appropriate parameters.

tests/test_scheduler_commands.py (1)

2-2: LGTM!

Appropriate import addition for the new test methods.

Comment on lines +17 to +29
class TestAbstractSchedulerCommands(unittest.TestCase):
@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_submit_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().submit_job_command)

@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_submit_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().delete_job_command)

@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_submit_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().get_queue_status_command)

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue

Fix duplicate method names and incorrect method testing.

There are two critical issues with this test class:

  1. Duplicate method names: All three test methods are named test_submit_job_command, but they should have unique names reflecting what they test.
  2. Testing method references instead of calling methods: The assertions test method references (e.g., .submit_job_command) instead of calling the methods (e.g., .submit_job_command()).

Apply this diff to fix both issues:

 class TestAbstractSchedulerCommands(unittest.TestCase):
     @patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
     def test_submit_job_command(self):
-        self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().submit_job_command)
+        self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().submit_job_command())

     @patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
-    def test_submit_job_command(self):
-        self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().delete_job_command)
+    def test_delete_job_command(self):
+        self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().delete_job_command())

     @patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
-    def test_submit_job_command(self):
-        self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().get_queue_status_command)
+    def test_get_queue_status_command(self):
+        self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().get_queue_status_command())
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
class TestAbstractSchedulerCommands(unittest.TestCase):
@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_submit_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().submit_job_command)
@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_submit_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().delete_job_command)
@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_submit_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().get_queue_status_command)
class TestAbstractSchedulerCommands(unittest.TestCase):
@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_submit_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().submit_job_command())
@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_delete_job_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().delete_job_command())
@patch.multiple(SchedulerCommands, __abstractmethods__=set())
def test_get_queue_status_command(self):
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().get_queue_status_command())
🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff (0.12.2)

23-23: Redefinition of unused test_submit_job_command from line 19

(F811)


27-27: Redefinition of unused test_submit_job_command from line 23

(F811)

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In tests/test_scheduler_commands.py lines 17 to 29, rename the three test
methods to have unique names that reflect the method they test, such as
test_submit_job_command, test_delete_job_command, and
test_get_queue_status_command. Also, update the assertions to call the methods
(e.g., submit_job_command()) instead of referencing them, so use
self.assertIsNone(SchedulerCommands().submit_job_command()) and similarly for
the other methods.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 2, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 85.30%. Comparing base (702c253) to head (54212ca).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #440      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.47%   85.30%   +0.82%     
==========================================
  Files          17       17              
  Lines         966      966              
==========================================
+ Hits          816      824       +8     
+ Misses        150      142       -8     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@jan-janssen jan-janssen merged commit efdc883 into main Aug 2, 2025
40 of 41 checks passed
@jan-janssen jan-janssen deleted the abstract_tests branch August 2, 2025 09:42
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.

2 participants