Skip to content

test: update test-crypto-aes-wrap to use node:test - #55110

Closed
jasnell wants to merge 2 commits into
nodejs:mainfrom
jasnell:update-crypto-test-structure
Closed

test: update test-crypto-aes-wrap to use node:test#55110
jasnell wants to merge 2 commits into
nodejs:mainfrom
jasnell:update-crypto-test-structure

Conversation

@jasnell

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

@nodejs-github-botnodejs-github-bot added needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. test Issues and PRs related to the tests. labels Sep 24, 2024
@codecov

codecovBot commented Sep 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.24%. Comparing base (0e52836) to head (9d261f7).
Report is 48 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #55110 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 88.25% 88.24% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 651 651 Lines 183871 183871 Branches 35859 35851 -8 ==========================================
- Hits 162271 162248 -23 - Misses 14895 14905 +10 - Partials 6705 6718 +13 

see 31 files with indirect coverage changes

@aduh95

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why?

@jasnell

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Why?

As I've discussed in other threads I'm working incrementally on trying to make our tests more structured so that they are easier to understand and easier to port/run in other environments. This is part of that effort.

@nodejs-github-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

const crypto = require('crypto');
// Disabling the unnecessary lint rule here. We're testing the common.hasCrypto
// in the skip option of the describe block.
/* eslint-disable node-core/crypto-check */

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wonder why don't we just skip crypto on the python runner? This would avoid spawning those threads?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Likely worthwhile.

@lpincalpinca left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would like to see an official TSC vote/decision on this which is not made for Cloudflare/workerd interests. It is like we go to another project and start making changes to their tests (with all the drawbacks that this might have for that project) so that it is easier for us to use their tests. That seems silly to me.

@jasnelljasnell closed this Sep 28, 2024
@aduh95

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I suspect it would be easier to review this kind of PR if there was some guide that explains what makes a test "less portable".

@lpincalpinca mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2024
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

needs-ciPRs that need a full CI run.testIssues and PRs related to the tests.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jasnell@aduh95@nodejs-github-bot@lpinca@anonrig