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

Add tests for partial account helper functions #3745

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

scorbajio
Copy link
Contributor

This change adds unit tests testing a variety of cases for the partial account helper functions:

  • createPartialAccount
  • createPartialAccountFromRLP
  • serializeWithPartialInfo

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 17, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 27.68%. Comparing base (4470cc3) to head (3a33278).
Report is 104 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

Flag Coverage Δ
block 67.57% <ø> (-5.89%) ⬇️
blockchain 83.49% <ø> (?)
client 0.00% <ø> (ø)
common 89.85% <ø> (?)
devp2p 0.00% <ø> (?)
evm 65.18% <ø> (?)
genesis 0.00% <ø> (?)
mpt 52.09% <ø> (?)
statemanager 67.41% <ø> (?)
tx 76.70% <ø> (-1.08%) ⬇️
util 78.31% <ø> (?)
vm 58.28% <ø> (?)
wallet 0.00% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Copy link
Member

@holgerd77 holgerd77 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this AI generated? If so can we please establish the convention (within the whole team) to always clearly mark/label this as such?

If so, we should clearly exchange on some best practices on how to review such code and what expectation we put on it.

If not: my apologies. 😂

@scorbajio
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is this AI generated? If so can we please establish the convention (within the whole team) to always clearly mark/label this as such?

If so, we should clearly exchange on some best practices on how to review such code and what expectation we put on it.

If not: my apologies. 😂

Sure, we can block this for now. I used AI to generate the boilerplate and cases, then reviewed, corrected, and filled in missing pieces of the tests to get it to compile 🙂.

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.

2 participants