[CT-1259] move account plus test functions to testutil #2444
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces significant changes to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
protocol/testutil/tx/msg_tx.go (2)
35-37: Consider usingcrypto/randfor cryptographic randomnessIn generating the random memo string, it's preferable to use
crypto/randfor cryptographic-grade randomness, especially if the randomness impacts transaction uniqueness or security.
22-32: Clarify parameter names forsignersandsignaturesThe parameters
signersandsignaturesare both slices ofcryptotypes.PrivKey, which may cause confusion. Consider renaming them to more accurately reflect their roles, such assignerKeysfor the public keys andsignerPrivKeysfor the private keys used for signing, or provide documentation to clarify their purposes.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- protocol/testutil/tx/msg_tx.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/accountplus/ante/ante_test.go (5 hunks)
- protocol/x/accountplus/ante/circuit_breaker_test.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/accountplus/authenticator/base_test.go (5 hunks)
- protocol/x/accountplus/authenticator/signature_authenticator_test.go (3 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (17)
protocol/x/accountplus/authenticator/base_test.go (3)
20-20: LGTM: Import addition is correct and aligns with PR objectives.The new import for
testtxis properly formatted and is used in the subsequent method modifications, which supports the goal of moving test functions to a utility file.
Line range hint
107-118: LGTM with a question: Clarify the purpose of the additionalnilargument.The change to use
testtx.GenTxaligns with the PR objective. However, could you please clarify the purpose of the additionalnilargument? It would be helpful to understand how this affects the behavior of the function and if there are any potential side effects.To verify the usage of
testtx.GenTx, please run the following script:#!/bin/bash # Description: Check the signature of testtx.GenTx and its usage # Test: Search for the definition of GenTx in the testtx package ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func GenTx($$$) $$$' # Test: Search for other usages of GenTx to compare arguments rg --type go 'testtx\.GenTx\(' -A 3
Line range hint
144-155: LGTM with a question: Clarify the purpose of the additionalnilargument.The change to use
testtx.MakeTxBuilderaligns with the PR objective. However, similar to the previous change, could you please explain the purpose of the additionalnilargument? It would be beneficial to understand its impact on the function's behavior and any potential side effects.To verify the usage of
testtx.MakeTxBuilder, please run the following script:✅ Verification successful
Clarification on the
nilArgument Added totesttx.MakeTxBuilderThe addition of the
nilargument aligns with the updated signature ofMakeTxBuilder, allowing for the specification ofselectedAuthenticators. In this context, passingnileffectively means no authenticators are being selected, which is appropriate for the current test scenario.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check the signature of testtx.MakeTxBuilder and its usage # Test: Search for the definition of MakeTxBuilder in the testtx package ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func MakeTxBuilder($$$) $$$' # Test: Search for other usages of MakeTxBuilder to compare arguments rg --type go 'testtx\.MakeTxBuilder\(' -A 3Length of output: 5558
protocol/x/accountplus/ante/circuit_breaker_test.go (4)
20-20: LGTM: New import for test transaction utility.The new import for the
testtxpackage is correctly formatted and appropriately aliased. This import suggests a move towards using a dedicated utility for generating test transactions, which is a good practice for maintaining consistent and reusable test code.
Line range hint
180-192: LGTM: Consistent usage oftesttx.GenTx.The second instance of
testtx.GenTxusage is consistent with the first, maintaining the same function signature. This change further reinforces the standardization of test transaction generation across the test suite, which is a positive step towards code consistency and maintainability.
Line range hint
137-149: LGTM: Updated to usetesttx.GenTx.The change from
GenTxtotesttx.GenTxis consistent with the new import and appears to be a drop-in replacement. This modification likely aims to use a standardized test transaction generation utility across the project, which is a good practice for maintaining consistent test code.To ensure the new function behaves identically to the old one, please run the following verification script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that testtx.GenTx is used consistently and correctly # Test: Check for any remaining usages of the old GenTx function rg --type go 'func.*GenTx' protocol/testutil rg --type go '(?<!testtx\.)GenTx\(' protocol/x/accountplus/ante # Test: Verify the signature of testtx.GenTx matches the old GenTx rg --type go 'func GenTx' protocol/testutil/tx
Line range hint
1-199: Overall: Good refactoring to use standardized test utilities.The changes in this file are part of a larger effort to standardize test utilities across the project. The introduction of
testtx.GenTxshould improve consistency and maintainability of test code without affecting the actual test logic or coverage.To ensure this refactoring is applied consistently across the project, please run the following verification script:
Consider updating other test files that might still be using the old
GenTxfunction to maintain consistency across the project.protocol/x/accountplus/authenticator/signature_authenticator_test.go (3)
10-10: LGTM: Import changes improve code organization.The addition of the
testtximport and removal of unused imports enhance code cleanliness and suggest better organization of test utilities.
Line range hint
1-305: Overall, the changes improve code organization without altering core functionality.The modifications in this file focus on enhancing code organization by utilizing centralized test utilities and removing unused imports. These changes align with good coding practices and don't introduce any apparent issues. The core test logic remains intact, ensuring that the existing test coverage is maintained.
To further improve the code:
- Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of the new
nilparameter in thetesttx.GenTxfunction call.- If there are any deprecated functions or utilities that were replaced by these changes, ensure they are removed from the codebase to prevent confusion.
Line range hint
245-256: LGTM: Updated to use centralized test utility, but clarification needed.The change to use
testtx.GenTxis good as it aligns with the new import and suggests a move towards more centralized test utilities. However, could you please clarify the purpose of the additionalnilparameter? It would be helpful to understand its significance or if it's related to new functionality in thetesttx.GenTxfunction.To ensure the
testtx.GenTxfunction is used consistently across the codebase, let's verify its usage:protocol/testutil/tx/msg_tx.go (2)
22-108: TheMakeTxBuilderfunction is well-implementedThe implementation of the
MakeTxBuilderfunction correctly sets up the transaction builder with the provided parameters, including handling signatures and extension options appropriately.
110-139: TheGenTxfunction correctly generates signed mock transactionsThe
GenTxfunction effectively utilizesMakeTxBuilderto generate signed mock transactions, facilitating testing processes.protocol/x/accountplus/ante/ante_test.go (5)
20-20: Importingtesttxfor transaction utilitiesThe addition of the
testtximport enhances code reuse and maintainability by leveraging shared transaction generation utilities fromprotocol/testutil/tx.
Line range hint
125-143: Consistent use of sharedGenTxfunctionReplacing the local
GenTxfunction withtesttx.GenTxpromotes consistency across tests and centralizes transaction generation logic.
Line range hint
198-216: Appropriate transition totesttx.GenTxThe usage of
testtx.GenTxin place of the previously definedGenTxfunction is appropriate and aligns with the refactoring efforts.
Line range hint
265-284: Verify the consistency of signer informationIn the call to
testtx.GenTx, only one private key is provided in thefromPrivsandsignersslices, while two messages are included. Ensure that the signer information correctly corresponds to the messages being sent.
Line range hint
381-403: Ensure correct usage oftesttx.GenTxwithin test casesWithin the test cases loop, verify that the parameters passed to
testtx.GenTxcorrectly reflect the intended test scenarios, especially regarding theselectedAuthenticatorand key assignments.
| sig, err := p.Sign(signBytes) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| panic(err) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoid panicking; return errors instead
In the MakeTxBuilder function, panicking upon encountering an error during signing isn't recommended. Instead, consider returning the error to allow the caller to handle it appropriately.
Apply this diff to modify the error handling:
sig, err := p.Sign(signBytes)
if err != nil {
- panic(err)
+ return nil, err
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| sig, err := p.Sign(signBytes) | |
| if err != nil { | |
| panic(err) | |
| } | |
| sig, err := p.Sign(signBytes) | |
| if err != nil { | |
| return nil, err | |
| } |
| err = txBuilder.SetSignatures(sigs...) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| panic(err) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoid panicking; return errors instead
When setting signatures in the MakeTxBuilder function, if an error occurs, it's better to return the error rather than panicking.
Apply this diff:
err = txBuilder.SetSignatures(sigs...)
if err != nil {
- panic(err)
+ return nil, err
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| err = txBuilder.SetSignatures(sigs...) | |
| if err != nil { | |
| panic(err) | |
| } | |
| err = txBuilder.SetSignatures(sigs...) | |
| if err != nil { | |
| return nil, err | |
| } |
Changelist
[Describe or list the changes made in this PR]
Test Plan
[Describe how this PR was tested (if applicable)]
Author/Reviewer Checklist
state-breakinglabel.indexer-postgres-breakinglabel.PrepareProposalorProcessProposal, manually add the labelproposal-breaking.feature:[feature-name].backport/[branch-name].refactor,chore,bug.Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Refactor
Bug Fixes