Skip to content

Replacing @Theory annotated test case to @Parameterized test case #3015

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2022
Merged

Replacing @Theory annotated test case to @Parameterized test case #3015

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2022

Conversation

joviegas
Copy link
Contributor

@joviegas joviegas commented Feb 4, 2022

Motivation and Context

  • Removing @theory annotated test cases since that annotation is experimental. This was causing integ test case to be stuck while test were getting loaded.
  • Also reverting the temp fix done as part of PR#2984

Modifications

  • Added timeout to detect any deadlocks.
  • Added Parameterized test case.

Testing

Screenshots (if appropriate)

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Checklist

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document
  • Local run of mvn install succeeds
  • My code follows the code style of this project
  • My change requires a change to the Javadoc documentation
  • I have updated the Javadoc documentation accordingly
  • I have added tests to cover my changes
  • All new and existing tests passed
  • I have added a changelog entry. Adding a new entry must be accomplished by running the scripts/new-change script and following the instructions. Commit the new file created by the script in .changes/next-release with your changes.
  • My change is to implement 1.11 parity feature and I have updated LaunchChangelog

License

  • [x I confirm that this pull request can be released under the Apache 2 license

@joviegas joviegas requested a review from a team as a code owner February 4, 2022 03:13
static Integer[] parallelClientValues = {1, 2, 8};
static Boolean[] sharedClientValue = {true, false};

private static Stream<Arguments> providePossibleCallPatternsWithDifferentConfigs() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice way of providing the combinations. How about

    private static Stream<Arguments> permutationsOfCrtCallParameters() {
        return Arrays.stream(eventLoopValues).flatMap(
            eventLoops -> Arrays.stream(connectionsValues).flatMap(
                connections -> Arrays.stream(requestValues).flatMap(
                    requests -> Arrays.stream(parallelClientValues).flatMap(
                        parallelClients -> Arrays.stream(sharedClientValue).map(
                            sharedClients -> Arguments.of(eventLoops, connections, requests, parallelClients, sharedClients))))));
    }

Including the parameter names instead of s1 etc makes it less abstract, and also collecting the parenthesis at the end is easier to read

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Feb 4, 2022

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@joviegas joviegas merged commit 84b2470 into aws:master Feb 7, 2022
aws-sdk-java-automation pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants