Skip to content
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

Increase coverage of the Core folder #10609

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Apr 29, 2020
Merged

Increase coverage of the Core folder #10609

merged 17 commits into from
Apr 29, 2020

Conversation

byorda-glb
Copy link
Contributor

@byorda-glb byorda-glb commented Apr 27, 2020

Purpose

Increase code coverage on the Core folder

Declarations

Check these if you believe they are true

  • The codebase is in a better state after this PR
  • Is documented according to the standards
  • The level of testing this PR includes is appropriate
  • User facing strings, if any, are extracted into *.resx files
  • All tests pass using the self-service CI.
  • Snapshot of UI changes, if any.
  • Changes to the API follow Semantic Versioning and are documented in the API Changes document.

Reviewers

Aaron Tang
Michael Kirschner

FYIs

Alfredo Pozo

@QilongTang
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM, Can you also post the coverage difference for future reference?

@byorda-glb
Copy link
Contributor Author

LGTM, Can you also post the coverage difference for future reference?

This is what I am seeing in my report:

image

But this is not accurate. DotCover groups by namespace, and the classes I'm covering here, even though their files are located in the Core folder, do not belong to the Dynamo.Core namespace.

var assemblyMock = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly();
AssemblyLoadedEventArgs eventArgs = new AssemblyLoadedEventArgs(assemblyMock);

Assert.AreEqual(assemblyMock, eventArgs.Assembly);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How about the code coverage under NodeModelAssemblyLoader? Is there a task to cover that or will be included in follow up PRs?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

NodeModelAssemblyLoader contains the class AssemblyLoadedEventArgs. So this is a small increment in the coverage of the former.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@byorda-glb Understood. I mean do you plan to add coverage to NodeModelAssemblyLoader later?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think so. The code that remains uncovered is composed of events and catch blocks, which are very tricky to test. If we need more coverage in Core, I'd look elsewhere first.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@byorda-glb Thank you for clarification. I think this PR is relatively safe to go in. I will merge it as it but @mjkkirschner may contact on fixing some previous tests

@QilongTang
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@QilongTang QilongTang added the LGTM Looks good to me label Apr 29, 2020
@QilongTang QilongTang merged commit f6c88c6 into DynamoDS:master Apr 29, 2020
reddyashish added a commit that referenced this pull request May 14, 2020
* add namespace conflict tests for short name replacer and node to code (#10611)

* Register custom node before package load reset (#10591)

This fixes a problem where existing custom nodes in the home workspace
became unresolved after a package that contained binaries was loaded.

The cause of the problem was that the compiled function was not
available at the time of the execution after a VM reset. Now the data
is registered on package load, by queueing it in
pendingCustomNodeSyncData. This results in a CompileCustomNodeAsyncTask
being scheduled before the update of the home workspace graph takes
place.

* Increase coverage of the Core folder (#10609)

* Add a test for the CrashPromptArgs class

* Update DynamoCoreTests.csproj

* Added NotificationObject tests

* Updated the test, NotificationObject coverage at 100%

* Changed some access modifiers

* Added coverage for Updates/BinaryVersion

* Added comments and fixed names

* Revert "Added comments and fixed names"

This reverts commit 42cd024.

* Revert "Added coverage for Updates/BinaryVersion"

This reverts commit 679deca.

* Increased coverage in CrashPromptArgs

* Added some Core coverage

* DYN-2560 - Increase the code coverage: DynamoCore/Models Folder First Part (#10612)

* DYN-2560 - Increase the code coverage: DynamoCore/Models Folder

I started adding just one test method TestOnRequestDispatcherBeginInvoke() for testing the DynamoModelEvents class.

* DYN-2560 - Adding test cases for DynamoModelEvents

Adding test cases for DynamoModelEvents

* DYN-2560 - Adding test cases for DynamoModelEvents

I added all the test cases for the all events  in the DynamoModelEvent class, i just need to fix the last 6 of them.

* DYN-2560 - Adding test cases for DynamoModelEventsArgs

I added several test cases for the classes inside the DynamoModelEventsArgs.cs file.

     ZoomEventArgs
     TaskDialogEventArgs
     EvaluationCompletedEventArgs
     DynamoModelUpdateArgs
     FunctionNamePromptEventArgs
     PresetsNamePromptEventArgs
     ViewOperationEventArgs
     PointEventArgs
     WorkspaceEventArgs
     ModelEventArgs

* DYN-2560 - Code Review Comments

Based in the comment done by Aaron in the GitHub pull request, I added more description comments for the method TestTaskDialogEventArgs() and also I added comments for a local function

* DYN-2560 - Code Review Comments 2

There was a spelling error in two methods for the word "Internally", then I fixed this error in the two places.

* Python Engine Enum (#10618)

* Cherrypick

* Comments

* Add unit test

* Comments

* Handle runtime table gaps on code block deletion (#10605)

When the runtime table are built there is an implicit assumption that
the code block ids are consecutive. However, that is not always the
case, as the deletion of a procedure causes the deletion of its child
code blocks, which may generate gaps in the id numbering.

In order to make the code resiliant to these gaps, the runtime tables
are sized based on the largest code block id, rather than in the amount
of code blocks.

* Validate ASM installations before loading (#10621)

The check for the specific assemblies tbb.dll and tbbmalloc.dll is
generalized to a full file list validation of detected ASM locations.
This way, Dynamo is guarded against any incomplete/unusual ASM binary
folders that other applications might include.

The lists of files for each version were taken from LibG. They cannot
be reused from LibG without involving major changes in the preloader,
so the lists should be kept in sync as new major release of ASM occur.

* SQ bug fix (#10622)

* (1) Null reference bug fix from SQ dashboard

* Add support for debug modes (#10603)

* Add support for debug modes

* Increase coverage of the Updates folder (#10628)

* Add a test for the CrashPromptArgs class

* Update DynamoCoreTests.csproj

* Added NotificationObject tests

* Updated the test, NotificationObject coverage at 100%

* Changed some access modifiers

* Added coverage for Updates/BinaryVersion

* Added comments and fixed names

* Added asserts for happy path, changed namespace and deleted a console function

* Removed using

* Revert "Removed using"

This reverts commit 022823d.

* Removed a change that should not be there

* Added coverage for Updates folder

* Tests for CPython3 Engine as well as for IronPython.

* [WIP][FEEDBACK] Reduce test time by substantially reducing number of serialization tests. (#10624)

* reduce number of serialization tests by factor 3~

* reduce wpf json serialization tests

* Handle missing instance calling method statically (#10630)

A code block node calling an instance method in its static form would
make Dynamo crash if the instance was not provided. An example of this
would be calling 'Curve.Patch();'.

The cause of the issue was that the default argument was ultimately
tried to be interpreted as a pointer. By avoiding that wrong conversion
the engine is now able to surface the real problem as a human-readable
warning.

* Python3 Selection Under Debug Modes (#10629)

* Cherrypick Python3 changes

* Cleanup

* Use Debug Modes

* CleanUp

* Rename Function

* Clean Up

* Do not use anouymous function as handler

* Revert newer language change

* Add adp analytics to Dynamo (#10576)

* add ADPTracker register

* Fix non-array item search for dot operation (#10633)

When an array is passed to the dot operation, it needs to get an item
to determine the actual class being processed. This was done in
ArrayUtils.GetFirstNonArrayStackValue, but the function only checked
the first item of the array and its descendants. This caused the dot
operation to failed when passed an array that contained an empty array
as its first item.

In order to fix the problem, the function was changed to check for
non-array items in the entire array. The function should stop as soon
as the first non-array item is found.

* Addressing some comments

* some more comments

* Update AssemblyInfo.cs

* Update AssemblyInfo.cs

* Marking the python node as modified when its engine property is modified

Also updated some tests.

* Remove unwanted check.

* changes to test

* Update AssemblySharedInfo.cs

* Using python engine's AcquireLock to avoid deadlock.

The deadlock was happening only when multiple PythonEngine's are initialized on a thread from 2 different test fixtures in the same run.
The main difference is calling this function PythonEngine.BeginAllowThreads().
Also we do not want to initialze the python engine if it is already initialized.

Co-authored-by: aparajit-pratap <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Martin Misol Monzo <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Bruno Yorda <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Roberto T <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Aaron (Qilong) <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ashish Aggarwal <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Tibi <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Michael Kirschner <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
LGTM Looks good to me
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants