feat: Obfuscate shards

[jan-goral]

Related to #1818

Test Plan

How do we know the code works?

Unit tests pass.

Checklist

• Documented
• Unit tested

[github-actions]

CLA Assistant Lite bot All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅

[mergify]

Title does not follow the guidelines of Conventional Commits.
Please adjust title before merge and use one of following prefix:

• build - Changes that affect the build system or external dependencies (dependencies update)
• ci - Changes to our CI configuration files and scripts (basically directory .github/workflows)
• docs - Documentation only changes
• feat - A new feature
• fix - A bug fix
• chore - Changes which does not touch the code (ex. manual update of release notes). It will not generate release notes changes
• refactor - A code change that contains refactor
• style - Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc)
• test - Adding missing tests or correcting existing tests and also changes for our test app
• perf - A code change that improves performance (I do not think we will use it)

[github-actions]

Timestamp: 2021-05-14 07:53:33
Buildscan url for ubuntu-workflow run 841478646
https://gradle.com/s/53kw23dgngtte

[pawelpasterz]

Hm... this code is quite hard to read and might be difficult to maintain in the future

[jan-goral]

I agree that our lint rules are annoying. The first version IMO was much better:

fun Shards.obfuscate(): Shards =
    map { shard ->
        shard.map { app ->
            app.copy(tests = app.tests.map { test ->
                test.copy(cases = test.cases.map { case ->
                    case.copy(name = obfuscationMappings.obfuscateAndroidTestName(case.name))
                })
            })
        }
    }

But lint requires newlines after the ( symbol.
@pawelpasterz Any other thoughts?

[pawelpasterz]

TBH I never thought about linter. What I meant - code in this form may be error prone. I'm aware it's partially enforced by structure of Shard (and that is fine).
That's why it's just a comment, not a change request -- I point there might be a problem here in the future, but don't have better solution on my mind

[jan-goral]

Ok. I have added explicit types and some comments that explain the meaning of this function.