-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 126
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
Add new test crate #368
Add new test crate #368
Conversation
f87fbc4
to
b7ac19f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice cleanup thanks! However, I have some questions. Also, I believe that this PR solves different issues at the same time. Is there a reason that you can't separate this PR?
@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@ | |||
/* |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are these now tests or examples :D? I suggest that we stay consistent with the naming. We can go either for tests or examples, but I am against this schizophrenic scheme.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually i think we should either make it bins, then we don't need to add the --example
flag all the time, what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The good thing about examples is that they are built automatically with cargo test
(but not run).
Binaries are also possible. Implication: Binaries are built with normal "cargo build --release". Not sure if that's a drawback or not.
What's certainly a drawback: CI needs to be adapted quite a bit, because the binaries are simply stored in the release
folder. Or is there a way to define an output folder?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nope, the change would imply that we need to copy it from another folder. Hmm, it is hard to say.
Ok, I will back off. If you think this is the suitable solution, I happily go with it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suitable... not sure. But the simplest one at leat 😄
4ad217c
to
0e002e1
Compare
fix tests fix features in toml add tests to example fmt clean up ci.yml fix fmt rename fmt to taplo fmt add job name add some nice naming renove extra nem fix CI add --release and add contains fix naming use release instead of (hugeee) debug fix contains fix generic_storage_tests fix payment info queries fix finalized update tests fix subscription fix compilation fix rebase changes fix tests fix tests add block hash readd seperate featrues to ci fix comments add OldWeight to runtime dispatch info rename bin folder to examples
0e002e1
to
e3cfe31
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Test the full functionality of the api client.
Update CI build:
--all
(deprecated) with--workspace
(see https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/commands/cargo-build.html)cargo test
anyway.Not CI related:
get_existential_deposit
. That's not really an useful example and is covered by the tests now.closes #353