Fds 2333 validate attribute unit tests #1517
Conversation
andrewelamb
commented
Oct 4, 2024
•
- Fixes FDS-2333
- Adds unit tests for Methods of the ValidateAttribute class
- Cleans up documentation for ValidateAttribute class
| @@ -1147,6 +1152,7 @@ def type_validation( | |||
| ) | |||
| if vr_errors: | |||
| errors.append(vr_errors) | |||
| # It seems impossible to get warnings with type rules | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this have any follow-up tech debt ticket?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes I think so. I wanted to mention it here to see if I misunderstood something first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@andrewelamb I'm not sure where I'm seeing where it's impossible, could you explain in case I missed something? The default message for all the type rules is error but for every validation rule a user could specify in their data model to specifically raise warnings or error regardless of the default level
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@GiaJordan that's doesn't appear to be true. See here.
"Use the type checker by setting the ‘Validation Rules’ to one of the types listed below. No additional specifiers are allowed. "
If you look at the code in the validator above that is confirmed. Unless the val_rule is one of ["num", "str", "int", "float"] you'll just get empty errors and warnigns back.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@andrewelamb that does look like the current behavior, I don't think that's intended though, but that would probably be another discussion. Message level specifications are allowed in the rule definitions in validation_rule_info()
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll start a jira issue then.
|
|
||
| ############## | ||
| # get_no_entry | ||
| ############## |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of grouping by comment like this should this be a new class?
class TestGetNoEntry:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah I'm not sure. Do other egineers have preferences for this?
Co-authored-by: BryanFauble <17128019+BryanFauble@users.noreply.github.com>
| # Because of the above line: manifest_col = manifest_col.astype(str) | ||
| # this column has been turned into a string, it's unclear if any values | ||
| # from this column can be anything other than a string, and therefore this | ||
| # if statement may not be needed | ||
| if not isinstance(list_string, str) and entry_has_value: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does anyone know why the isinstance(list_string, str) check is needed?
|
