Added tests for GetMany and NoGetter in GetterImplTest #1
Conversation
|
Processing PR updates... |
|
Thanks @2lambda123 for opening this PR! For COLLABORATOR only :
|
|
Seems you are using me but didn't get OPENAI_API_KEY seted in Variables/Secrets for this repo. you could follow readme for more information |
![gitginie[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/712912?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@2lambda123
Thank you for your contribution to this repository! We appreciate your effort in opening pull request.
Happy coding!
|
Unable to locate .performanceTestingBot config file |
Reviewer's Guide by SourceryThis pull request addresses a permission issue by adding a new test suite for the File-Level Changes
Tips
|
Their most recently public accepted PR is: 2lambda123/abp#93 |
|
First PR by @2lambda123 PR Details of @2lambda123 in optics-dev-Monocly :
|
PR summaryThis Pull Request addresses a permission issue by ensuring that the SuggestionConsider providing more descriptive error messages in the Disclaimer: This comment was entirely generated using AI. Be aware that the information provided may be incorrect. Current plan usage: 0.27% Have feedback or need help? |
|
Warning Review failedThe pull request is closed. Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
penify-dev
bot
changed the title
![codereviewbot-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/309638?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| test("GetMany getOne") { | ||
| val getter = GetManyImpl((x: List[Int]) => x) | ||
| val input = List(1,2,3) | ||
| assertEquals( | ||
| getter.get(input), | ||
| 1 | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The test case "GetMany getOne" is asserting that getter.get(input) returns 1, but it is not clear from the provided code why this should be the expected behavior. The function passed to GetManyImpl simply returns the input list, and there is no indication that the first element of the list should be returned by getter.get.
Recommendation: Ensure that the GetManyImpl class or object is correctly implemented to return the first element of the list, or adjust the test case to reflect the actual expected behavior of the getter.get method.
Micro-Learning Topic: Descriptive error message (Detected by phrase)Matched on "descriptive error message"Displaying too much information on why an error has occurred can lead to sensitive information exposure or provide information useful for an attacker to identify or exploit another vulnerability. Try a challenge in Secure Code Warrior |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@2lambda123
Thank you for your contribution to this repository! We appreciate your effort in closing pull request.
Happy coding!
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @2lambda123 - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟢 General issues: all looks good
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.
PR Review 🔍
|
labels-and-badges
bot
added
NO JIRA
|
Check out the playback for this Pull Request here. |
PR Code Suggestions ✨
|
User description
Description
Related Issue
Types of changes
Checklist:
Description
GetMany getOneandNoGetter getOneinGetterImplTest.scala.Changes walkthrough 📝
GetterImplTest.scala
Added tests for GetMany and NoGettersrc/test/scala/monocly/impl/GetterImplTest.scala
['Added test for
GetMany getOne', 'Added test forNoGetter getOne']Summary by Sourcery
This pull request introduces new unit tests for the
GetManyImplandNoGetterclasses to validate their functionality and compilation behavior.GetManyImplandNoGetterclasses to verify their behavior and ensure correct compilation.