-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 82
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
- support querying and validating multiple tables for existing proces… #550
Conversation
…sors. - added more tables handled by processors - add support cli args
a9a7351
to
60c90da
Compare
} | ||
|
||
#[allow(dead_code)] | ||
pub fn parse_test_args() -> TestArgs { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
does this helpfully complain if insufficient/bad args are provided?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one thing is that we would have to passing addition --
to bypass failing unrecognized argument from cargo test
1. cargo test
2. cargo test diff_tests
3. cargo test diff_tests -- --nocapture --generate-output
4. cargo test diff_tests -- -- --generate-output <-- like this
5. cargo test -- --nocapture
test passed locally.
|
00e3be6
to
b796b33
Compare
@@ -25,25 +25,37 @@ pub fn remove_transaction_timestamp(value: &mut Value) { | |||
} | |||
|
|||
#[allow(dead_code)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we put all these in a mod tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this prevents us from importing : aptos-labs/aptos-indexer-processor-sdk#73
(test_args.generate_output, test_args.output_path) | ||
} | ||
|
||
pub fn parse_test_args() -> TestArgs { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we also reuse the function defined in the SDK?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
which function are you referring to?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh I thought parse_test_args is part of the SDK. I feel like it should be part of the testing framework SDK, wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah also thought about that whether we should let them decide to use their own way of passing those args (generate-files and custom_path), b/c they might want more customzied way. but we can expose first and gather their feedback
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I prefer us to standardize the test tooling and establish consistency in structuring / running tests. If we allow too much customization, it might be confusing and too much extra work. The only parts users should provide are the processor config and the db outputs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
35c113e
to
1f5523a
Compare
Description
https://github.com/aptos-labs/aptos-indexer-processors/pull/545/files Part 1