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

Manually extracted refined types as test cases #45

Open
duklin opened this issue Feb 7, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Manually extracted refined types as test cases #45

duklin opened this issue Feb 7, 2022 · 0 comments
Labels
@boundary Related to the @boundary annotation @enum Related to the @enum annotation testing 🧪 Additional automated tests

Comments

@duklin
Copy link
Contributor

duklin commented Feb 7, 2022

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe

The manually extracted types here have the same structure of refined types as we expect to automatically extract using the package_parser. This is the reason why we can use them as test cases in unit testing to test the refined types extraction methods.

Desired solution

Parametrize the unit tests for extracting refined types from the JSON files in here.

Possible alternatives (optional)

Screenshots (optional)

Additional context (optional)

@duklin duklin added the enhancement 💡 New feature or request label Feb 7, 2022
@lars-reimann lars-reimann transferred this issue from lars-reimann/sem21 Feb 10, 2022
@lars-reimann lars-reimann added @enum Related to the @enum annotation @boundary Related to the @boundary annotation labels Jul 13, 2022
@lars-reimann lars-reimann added testing 🧪 Additional automated tests and removed enhancement 💡 New feature or request labels Mar 19, 2023
@lars-reimann lars-reimann transferred this issue from Safe-DS/API-Editor Mar 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
@boundary Related to the @boundary annotation @enum Related to the @enum annotation testing 🧪 Additional automated tests
Projects
Status: Backlog
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants