feat(test): cowtowncoder#87 added a new test for LockedFile #110
Conversation
- A cool feature that I discovered is that the constructor will create files for you even if they do not exist - It looks like it has some hidden logic for negative timestamps
| public void constructor_givenNonExistentFile_shouldCreateANewFile() throws IOException { | ||
| // given | ||
| File blankFile = temporaryFolder.newFile(); | ||
| File nonExistentFile = new File(blankFile + ".nonexistent"); | ||
|
|
||
| if (Files.exists(nonExistentFile.toPath())) { | ||
| fail("temp file should not exist"); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // when | ||
| new LockedFile(nonExistentFile); | ||
|
|
||
| // then - the nonexistent file now exists? | ||
| assertTrue(Files.exists(nonExistentFile.toPath())); | ||
| assertTrue(nonExistentFile.canRead()); | ||
| assertTrue(nonExistentFile.canWrite()); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was the really cool use case where if you give it a nonexistent file, the LockedFile class will go ahead and create the file. Pretty neat ey?
| public class LockedFileTest | ||
| { | ||
| @Rule | ||
| public TemporaryFolder temporaryFolder = new TemporaryFolder(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Take note that I do leverage the TemporaryFolder library to create fake dummy files that are automatically cleaned up after the test finishes up.
| @Test | ||
| public void constructor_givenNull_shouldThrowNullPointerException() throws IOException { | ||
| try { | ||
| new LockedFile(null); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To be honest, this is kind of unit test that I think is basically worthless, and I don't want to add too many similar even for compliance purposes.
I'll tweak the PR and leave just skeletal aspect.
|
First of all, thank you for submitting this! While I am not a big fan of super-extensive testing for purposes of code coverage, it is cool to get some coverage for this helper class. So that's good. On yeah, in hindsight I think that is slightly wrong (my fault obviously :) ) -- constructors should not typically do such heavy lifting. But I wrote JUG 20 years ago so... live & learn :) |
|
@SquireOfSoftware well done! Code coverage (line coverage, I think?) shot up by 5% pct units, now well over 50% overall. |
What did I do?
As per this comment: #87 (comment), I wrote some tests for LockedFile covering:
Extra notes
There were also some cool things that I discovered:
Let me know if the coverage is not good enough and I can add more usecases to the tests