tests: better coverage across the board about dep HOT 11 CLOSED

adding the good first pr label, because test could be added for any function, big or small, we also have a framework for integration testing where you could easily copy paste another test and change some things to test something else

from dep.

Looks like Context.LoadProject is uncovered. Any particular reason? If not, I can work on a unit test for that one after I figure out how you've all set up / torn down test files for os calls in other tests. Sound okay?

from dep.

@tro3 no reason for it :) that's be a great help - you'd effectively be codifying some very important rules about how we decide what the boundaries of projects. Thanks!

from dep.

No problem. Do you have a doc as to what the intended behavior is, or would you prefer I use the existing code as the "spec" and write tests to cover it and guard against future breakage?

from dep.

@tro3 nope, no actual spec for it, so best to take code as spec and work from there.

ideally...if you have time 😄 ...you could also write up some docs explaining how it works, so that we can sorta retro-spec it. would ease discussions about it in the future, and/or contribute to the docs that we are sorely lacking

from dep.

Will do. One question - I assume the lock file is supposed to always be in the same directory as the manifest? If so, there is a bug when locating the root while ascending.

from dep.

I was just working on some initial tests for LoadProject. I can create a PR for that if that's ok, and expand cases from there.

from dep.

@mem ah, thanks, that'd be great! though it looks like @tro3 is already working on some for LoadProject. Maybe have a look at their PR, see if you can suggest some of those additional cases? Or if not, I'm sure we can find something else :)

from dep.

Sure, no problem. It was more of an accident. I looked at the open issues, spotted this one and started working on that function just to get a feeling of the code structure, etc. I'll look at the coverage for other functions and post here before writing anything else :-)

from dep.

No worries, @mem - I just looked at #199 and they could be pulled and not step on each other. I'll leave it up to @sdboyer. My PR tonight or tomorrow will also include the ascending bug fix, which I moved to #198, and a (slightly) improved docstring.

from dep.

I think we're doing much better with this now, especially with the harness. I'm gonna close this out in favor of more specific issues 😄

from dep.