-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 457
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Refactor & review test #259
Comments
Hi! I'd be willing to work on this |
Hey @jmuzsik, very awesome! I just merged #343 which changed the framework to jest. I did refactor some tests for units I did extract e.g.
I think they should all be split up into smaller files which only test specific things. Looking forward to your help. It would be great if you could create a PR immediatly when you push your first branch and just name it with Also if you can package your changes into small PRs that would be best, as I can merge them faster and easier. 👍 Just FYI, as I don't know how well you know jest:
Thanks mate. |
Ok! Great, so for example: in Internal function tests:
all ought to be in their own files, and I will need to slightly modify the code to fit into the Jest framework just as you did with Simultaneously, I ought to put more descriptive comments about what is exactly happening within the test? Though, solely if the comments are not already there. (this I cannot guarantee ideal work as I cannot assure that my reading/testing of the code will be the truth). Or am I reading this wrong: " Tests needs to be reviews, what is missing, what is actually tested I'm working on several things right now as well, so I'll likely be doing a little every few days if that is alright. |
Hey @jmuzsik,
Sure, I appreciate any help you can put it, no worries. Adding descriptive comments will definitely be very helpful. Feel free to also improve comments that are already there. And yes, refactoring into smaller files, like your example suggests would be great! For example, in many cases we can probably just use If you find issues / improvements with the package code, please feel free to send PRs for this or create issues. 😉 And if you don't understand something, let me know so I can help (some of the code is written in a rather complicated way, which I am hoping to improve soon). Thank you very much. 👍 |
Also, I only added |
Ok got it! I'll begin working on this today. |
@jmuzsik is this already finished or are you still working on it? |
If anyone is still interested, this is still ongoing. |
@lukasoppermann Hey is this issue still ongoing? If it is the case I would like a short guidance and will try to work on it |
Hey @tridungng, yes it is. There is no open PR, so you can just create a new PR for your work. I would appreciate it if you could create small PRs. E.g. fix one or two tests and send a PR with just those. It makes it easier for me to review and merge. If you have any specific questions, please let me know so I can provide better guidance. |
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: