Improve embit utils test coverage 343 #388
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jdlcdl
commented
Jun 12, 2023
jdlcdl
commented
Jun 12, 2023
jdlcdl
commented
Jun 12, 2023
|
Im just having fun, |
|
ACK and tested. Even if this test isn't needed, it's mostly harmless. My main push back would be creating SO MANY tests it becomes a support burden. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
resolves #343
At this point in time, this pr does NOT add any new application code, it is aimed at maximum test coverage of embit_utils, bringing coverage from ~11% to ~95%.
This pr does however hint towards 2 "good-practice" changes in embit_utils; see coverage's html report for details:
elseat the bottom of get_single_sig_address() and raising a ValueError if script_type unknown.elseat the bottom of get_multisig_address() and raising a ValueError if policy is unknown.