-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
Chore/improve test event api coverage #3797
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Chore/improve test event api coverage #3797
Conversation
📝 Walkthrough""" WalkthroughThe pull request introduces new functionality to the event API tests by enhancing payload validation. It adds a dictionary for error messages and a variable defining required fields in the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Test as TestCase Method
participant API as API Endpoint
participant Validator as Payload Validator
Test->>API: Send request for event creation/update with missing/empty fields
API->>Validator: Validate payload using PAYLOAD_FIELDS
Validator-->>API: Return error messages (_test_payload_error_messages)
API-->>Test: Respond with error messages
Test->>Test: Assert expected error responses
""" 📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🧰 Additional context used🪛 Ruff (0.8.2)lego/apps/events/tests/test_events_api.py542-542: Use a regular Replace (PT009) 550-550: Use a regular Replace (PT009) 584-584: Use a regular Replace (PT009) 589-589: Use a regular Replace (PT009) 593-593: Use a regular Replace (PT009) 🔇 Additional comments (5)
✨ Finishing Touches
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
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.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
lego/apps/events/tests/test_events_api.py
(3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Ruff (0.8.2)
lego/apps/events/tests/test_events_api.py
520-528: Mutable class attributes should be annotated with typing.ClassVar
(RUF012)
541-541: Use a regular assert
instead of unittest-style assertEqual
Replace assertEqual(...)
with assert ...
(PT009)
549-549: Use a regular assert
instead of unittest-style assertEqual
Replace assertEqual(...)
with assert ...
(PT009)
583-583: Use a regular assert
instead of unittest-style assertEqual
Replace assertEqual(...)
with assert ...
(PT009)
588-588: Use a regular assert
instead of unittest-style assertIn
Replace assertIn(...)
with assert ...
(PT009)
592-592: Use a regular assert
instead of unittest-style assertEqual
Replace assertEqual(...)
with assert ...
(PT009)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
lego/apps/events/tests/test_events_api.py (4)
229-235
: Good addition to centralize error messages for validation tests.Storing error messages in a dictionary makes the code more maintainable and ensures consistent message validation across tests.
538-545
: Comprehensive test for required fields during event creation.This test ensures that all required fields are properly validated when attempting to create an event with an empty payload.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff (0.8.2)
541-541: Use a regular
assert
instead of unittest-styleassertEqual
Replace
assertEqual(...)
withassert ...
(PT009)
546-553
: Comprehensive test for required fields during event updates.This test ensures that all required fields are properly validated when attempting to update an event with an empty payload.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff (0.8.2)
549-549: Use a regular
assert
instead of unittest-styleassertEqual
Replace
assertEqual(...)
withassert ...
(PT009)
554-596
: Thorough test for empty fields validation in payloads.This test verifies the API's handling of empty field values across both POST and PUT operations, checking different validation error types based on field requirements.
Note the intentional misspelling of "desciption" at line 574 tests how the API handles missing required fields.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff (0.8.2)
583-583: Use a regular
assert
instead of unittest-styleassertEqual
Replace
assertEqual(...)
withassert ...
(PT009)
588-588: Use a regular
assert
instead of unittest-styleassertIn
Replace
assertIn(...)
withassert ...
(PT009)
592-592: Use a regular
assert
instead of unittest-styleassertEqual
Replace
assertEqual(...)
withassert ...
(PT009)
Description
This PR adds test coverage for required fields in the API payload, verifying that they are present, contain valid values, and are not null. It ensures stricter validation and improves the reliability of API requests.
Testing