Re: D19 Comments and Diff
> I also want to avoid increasing the maintenance burden of having
a
> bunch of tests that look for things which don't really need to be
> tested (setting data members, checking default values etc.)
I agree, there is stuff that kind of can be taken for granted.
Coincidentally, I have an anecdote to tell... of this morning.
I have went ahead and implemented Tim's suggestion here:
https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D19?id=49#inline-127
A damn simple change, just replace (slightly modified for readability):
self._result = None
with
self._result = 'NEEDS_INSPECTION'
in the constructor and a trivial adjustment in the result getter.
However, my 'trivial' tests actually saved me:
=================================== FAILURES ===================================
_______________________ TestCheckDetail.test_init_raise ________________________
self = <testing.test_check.TestCheckDetail instance at 0x2fc1d88>
def test_init_raise(self):
'''Test instance creation that raises an error - invalid
parameters'''
with pytest.raises(exc.TaskotronValueError):
check.CheckDetail(result='INVALID TYPE')
E
Failed: DID NOT RAISE
testing/test_check.py:38: Failed
______________________ TestCheckDetail.test_update_result ______________________
self = <testing.test_check.TestCheckDetail instance at 0x343f638>
def test_update_result(self):
'''Test 'update_result' method'''
# basic use case
self.cd.update_result('FAILED')
assert self.cd.result == 'FAILED'
E assert
'NEEDS_INSPECTION' == 'FAILED'
E - NEEDS_INSPECTION
E + FAILED
testing/test_check.py:66: AssertionError
================ 2 failed, 50 passed, 1 skipped in 0.32 seconds ================
So, even those simple tests have some value, sometimes.
Of course, there's no point in testing whether simple "class.attr = value"
statement really works. But if attr is a property (having setter/getter), now it starts to
make sense. And also if the documentation says it should have some default value (other
than None), it's useful to test it. I don't think it's strictly required, but
I definitely wouldn't call it unnecessary.