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 some tests #850

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Jan 29, 2024
Merged

Fix some tests #850

merged 10 commits into from
Jan 29, 2024

Conversation

stefano-ottolenghi
Copy link
Contributor

@stefano-ottolenghi stefano-ottolenghi commented Jan 19, 2024

  • A setup block was (silently) failing due to an extra trailing comma. With that fixed, the test for the other example failed because Charlie was not reported as a string in the asciidoc.
  • test-result-skip is not needed when a result is missing, only when a result is present but different from what the tester would get.
  • No need to test-skip when query parameters are missing: the tester skips automatically.
  • After a query block, there may only be one result block, either of type queryresult or queryplan. If there's both of them, the parser will pick the first one, but its internal state will probably also get messed up.
  • The last two query plans were surely wrong (they didn't have the right return value), while I'm not sure about the first. It may be something that changed in newer releases or IDK, they look pretty similar.

@stefano-ottolenghi stefano-ottolenghi changed the title Fix test (string + failing setup) Fix some test Jan 19, 2024
@stefano-ottolenghi stefano-ottolenghi changed the title Fix some test Fix some tests Jan 19, 2024
@JPryce-Aklundh JPryce-Aklundh added the cherry-pick-this-to-5.x Cherry pick this PR changes to the 5.x branch label Jan 29, 2024
@neo-technology-commit-status-publisher
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the documentation updates.

The preview documentation has now been torn down - reopening this PR will republish it.

@JPryce-Aklundh JPryce-Aklundh merged commit 340d71e into dev Jan 29, 2024
5 checks passed
@JPryce-Aklundh JPryce-Aklundh deleted the fix-test branch January 29, 2024 10:11
JPryce-Aklundh added a commit to JPryce-Aklundh/docs-cypher that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- A setup block was (silently) failing due to an extra trailing comma.
With that fixed, the test for the other example failed because `Charlie`
was not reported as a string in the asciidoc.
- `test-result-skip` is not needed when a result is missing, only when a
result is present but _different_ from what the tester would get.
- No need to `test-skip` when query parameters are missing: the tester
skips automatically.
- After a query block, there may only be _one_ result block, either of
type `queryresult` or `queryplan`. If there's both of them, the parser
will pick the first one, but its internal state will probably also get
messed up.
- The last two query plans were surely wrong (they didn't have the right
return value), while I'm not sure about the first. It may be something
that changed in newer releases or IDK, they look pretty similar.

---------

Co-authored-by: Jens Pryce-Åklundh <[email protected]>
JPryce-Aklundh added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- A setup block was (silently) failing due to an extra trailing comma.
With that fixed, the test for the other example failed because `Charlie`
was not reported as a string in the asciidoc.
- `test-result-skip` is not needed when a result is missing, only when a
result is present but _different_ from what the tester would get.
- No need to `test-skip` when query parameters are missing: the tester
skips automatically.
- After a query block, there may only be _one_ result block, either of
type `queryresult` or `queryplan`. If there's both of them, the parser
will pick the first one, but its internal state will probably also get
messed up.
- The last two query plans were surely wrong (they didn't have the right
return value), while I'm not sure about the first. It may be something
that changed in newer releases or IDK, they look pretty similar.

---------

Co-authored-by: Stefano Ottolenghi <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cherry-pick-this-to-5.x Cherry pick this PR changes to the 5.x branch
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants