Better testing for blockchain
#23
Conversation
jordanschalm
changed the title
blockchainblockchain
29 makefile
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks great to me. But I'm a bit concerned about the validity of creating randomized test fixtures, makes replication of errors non-deterministic.
It would be nice to have the option to pass parameters to some of these fixtures as well (validating inputs and outputs).
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func newTxOutput() TxOutput { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These helpers are great, but perhaps we could expose a parameter generate this TxOutput fixture in a way that is not random? Im thinking about testing valid transaction inputs and outputs 🤔
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| ## Testing | ||
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| go test ./... |
| miner Wallet | ||
| BlockNumber uint32 | ||
| LastBlock Hash | ||
| Miner Address |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What kind of address will this be?
| gob.NewDecoder(r).Decode(b) | ||
| err := gob.NewEncoder(w).Encode(b) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| fmt.Println(err.Error()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably change this to a Log statement at some point.
| func (bc *BlockChain) Decode(r io.Reader) { | ||
| gob.NewDecoder(r).Decode(bc) | ||
| // DecodeBlockChain reads the marshalled blockchain from the given io.Reader | ||
| func DecodeBlockChain(r io.Reader) *BlockChain { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will we have to implement our own Blockchain io Reader to handle the format of the Blockchain in byte array format?
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Marshaller is any type that can convert itself to a byte slice | ||
| type Marshaller interface { |
| mrand "math/rand" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| func newHash() Hash { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does't one of the imports have a function that can do this for us?
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Len returns the length of a transaction body | ||
| func (tb TxBody) Len() int { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps func (tb *TxBody) Len() int would be better here? Not sure about the semantics, but something to think about.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This goes for other exported functions on structs as well.
No description provided.