| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Signed-off-by: Dennis Gaebler <dennis.gaebler@uni-ulm.de>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks!
The downside to this approach is that if one of the assertions raise then the next test will also fail since disable_legacy_validation() will no longer be called. A couple options would be to:
Sorry, something went wrong.
Signed-off-by: Dennis Gaebler <dennis.gaebler@uni-ulm.de>
|
Thanks for your feedback, I didn't think of that. I added a context manager that enables and disables legacy validation and changed all uses of these functions to with statements |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks great, thanks!
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
For a university course, I tested this project for flaky tests, which are tests that can both pass or fail without changes to their code. I noticed that the tests changed in #1070 fail when their execution order is changed because the legacy validation is enabled in some tests but disabled in the test that follows. Since the execution order is not ensured, it's safer to disable them in the same test.
With these changes applied, the whole test suit passes every time even when executed in random order.