test: New HAPI test for TokenAirdrop transaction

[Evdokia-Georgieva]

Description:
This PR adds one test case to TokenAirdropTest.java

The test case extends AIRDROP_27 with max transfers, max tokens, max receivers, max fee collectors in order to ensure that the transaction limit is not reached.

This PR also modifies TokenAirdropBase.java -> createAccountsAndTokensWithAllCustomFees() is added

Test Plan:
https://www.notion.so/TokenAirdropTransaction-Test-Plan-919ed1800ee845378c5c625648d05ebc?pvs=4

Resolves

1. Extend test AIRDROP - 27 with max transfers, max tokens, max receivers, max fee collectors so that we ensure we won't hit the transaction limit #15301

[codacy-production]

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation	Diff coverage
✅ +0.00% (target: -1.00%)	✅ ∅

Coverage variation details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Coverage
Common ancestor commit (c7f12c7)	108843	67060	61.61%
Head commit (3ff26d0)	108843 (+0)	67060 (+0)	61.61% (+0.00%)

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Diff coverage
Pull request (#15348)	0	0	∅ (not applicable)

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

_{Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 58.06%. Comparing base (c7f12c7) to head (3ff26d0).
Report is 33 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             develop   #15348   +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage      58.06%   58.06%           
  Complexity     21526    21526           
==========================================
  Files           2775     2775           
  Lines         109026   109026           
  Branches       11171    11171           
==========================================
  Hits           63307    63307           
  Misses         41856    41856           
  Partials        3863     3863           

[tinker-michaelj]

Very systematic treatment @Evdokia-Georgieva , nice work!

Our style guide for @HapiTest's does recommend splitting large tests into multiple smaller tests that focus on very specific scenarios. 🙏

[Evdokia-Georgieva]

Very systematic treatment @Evdokia-Georgieva , nice work!

Our style guide for @HapiTest's does recommend splitting large tests into multiple smaller tests that focus on very specific scenarios. 🙏

@tinker-michaelj in my latest commit I did my best to change the test according to the style guide, unfortunately I could not strictly fulfil the rule for maximum of 7 operations per test. I had to include a little bit more checks as in the test case I need to perform airdrop transaction with the maximum allowed 10 transfers and each transfer needs to have different fee collector account.
In order to shorten the test, I removed the checks for the receiver balances as they only confirm that the receiver still has none of the airdropped tokens. I assume that as we confirm that the pending airdrops are created then the receiver balance will be correct, but I think that it is important to check the fee collectors account balances with the transferred fees and this adds few more operations.
I hope that for this case we can make an exception and allow it to have these few more operations. Please let me know if you agree or I should find another solution.
Thank you in advance for your help!

[kimbor]

lgtm; I don't see a way to split this large test up into smaller tests, as the whole point of this test is to test a multiple transfer scenario

[tinker-michaelj]

LGTM, tyvm @Evdokia-Georgieva !

[JivkoKelchev]

LGTM, thank you @Evdokia-Georgieva

[Neeharika-Sompalli]

LGTM! Thanks @Evdokia-Georgieva