-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 51
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
add unit tests for reference input transform #366
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## bazel-6 #366 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 91.81% 91.91% +0.09%
===========================================
Files 339 339
Lines 27009 27009
Branches 1954 1957 +3
===========================================
+ Hits 24799 24824 +25
+ Misses 2197 2172 -25
Partials 13 13 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
new CommonTypesPlugin(), | ||
]); | ||
|
||
expect(current?.validation).not.toBeUndefined(); |
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.
Do we need this if we are already testing for the validation object toHaveProperty("severity", "error");
on line 106?
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.
I think it just makes the test more easily identifiable if it fails, this will fail for the object not being defined, instead of saying it cant find a property
Should we also test for existence and functionality of the |
input
transformChange Type (required)
Indicate the type of change your pull request is:
patch
minor
major
Does your PR have any documentation updates?