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

Fix #808: Updated the initial test to include the ES Info API calls and renamed… #837

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

wmoleski
Copy link

@wmoleski wmoleski commented Aug 25, 2020

… the source file to es_info_test.c.

Describe the contribution
Added additional ES API tests using UT_Assert and printing info structures returned from App and Task Info calls.

Testing performed
Testing was done based upon the expected returns from these API functions.

Expected behavior changes
No impact

System(s) tested on
-cFE bootes release candidate

Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Walt Moleski GSFC Code 582

@wmoleski wmoleski changed the title Updated the initial test to include the ES Info API calls and renamed… Fix #808: Updated the initial test to include the ES Info API calls and renamed… Aug 25, 2020
UtPrintf ("Task Info -> Task Name = %s\n",taskInfo.TaskName);
UtPrintf ("Task Info -> AppId = %d\n",taskInfo.AppId);
UtPrintf ("Task Info -> App Name = %s\n",taskInfo.AppName);
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Recommend making all of these printfs into asserts of some type. Ideally tests should not require a manual inspection by a human - we shouldn't assume someone is necessarily looking at the result beyond pass/fail (e.g. CI testing).

If there isn't a particular value or range of values (e.g. address), perhaps just assert they are nonzero or non-empty strings.

@skliper skliper marked this pull request as draft August 31, 2020 16:22
@astrogeco
Copy link
Contributor

@skliper what do we want to do with this?

@skliper
Copy link
Contributor

skliper commented Oct 2, 2020

@astrogeco Leave it in draft until I have a chance to work it w/ Walt.

@skliper skliper added the CCB:Ignore Pull Request can be ignored. Will be re-examined at by next CCB. label Mar 5, 2021
@skliper skliper requested a review from zanzaben March 16, 2021 13:31
@skliper
Copy link
Contributor

skliper commented Aug 6, 2021

Duplicate of #1251

@skliper skliper marked this as a duplicate of #1251 Aug 6, 2021
@skliper skliper closed this Aug 6, 2021
@skliper skliper added duplicate and removed CCB:Ignore Pull Request can be ignored. Will be re-examined at by next CCB. labels Aug 6, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants