Skip to content
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

Complete test coverage by testing with a real Django Q object. #19

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 30, 2016

Conversation

donkirkby
Copy link
Collaborator

I don't know if there was a reason for mocking out the Django Q object and calling filter_q(), but this gets us to 100% test coverage and didn't cause any problems that I could see.

@codecov-io
Copy link

Current coverage is 100% (diff: 100%)

Merging #19 into master will increase coverage by 0.99%

@@             master   #19   diff @@
=====================================
  Files             5     5          
  Lines           303   303          
  Methods           0     0          
  Messages          0     0          
  Branches          0     0          
=====================================
+ Hits            300   303     +3   
+ Misses            3     0     -3   
  Partials          0     0          

Powered by Codecov. Last update 41d2ec2...ae43c91

@stphivos
Copy link
Owner

Thanks! Yes there was a reason but not a very good one. I wanted initially to unit test all MockSet methods in isolation but since filter_q is "private" and not a real QuerySet method maybe it makes more sense to test it through the filter interface.

@stphivos stphivos merged commit b0bcd0a into stphivos:master Nov 30, 2016
@donkirkby donkirkby deleted the filter-q branch December 14, 2016 18:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants