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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

HPCC-33526: Update datamaskingtests failure identification and reporting #19568

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: candidate-9.10.x
Choose a base branch
from
Open

HPCC-33526: Update datamaskingtests failure identification and reporting #19568

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+113 −475

Conversation

timothyklemm
Copy link
Contributor

@timothyklemm timothyklemm commented Feb 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Use framework assertion macros to identify and report failures.

  • Do not throw exceptions to signal failure.
  • Do not report failures using [f]printf.
  • Improve accuracy of failure reporting.
  • Eliminate overhead associated with manual failure logging.

Type of change:

  • This change is a bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
  • This change is a new feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
  • This change improves the code (refactor or other change that does not change the functionality)
  • This change fixes warnings (the fix does not alter the functionality or the generated code)
  • This change is a breaking change (fix or feature that will cause existing behavior to change).
  • This change alters the query API (existing queries will have to be recompiled)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
    • My code does not create any new warnings from compiler, build system, or lint.
  • The commit message is properly formatted and free of typos.
    • The commit message title makes sense in a changelog, by itself.
    • The commit is signed.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
    • I have updated the documentation accordingly, or...
    • I have created a JIRA ticket to update the documentation.
    • Any new interfaces or exported functions are appropriately commented.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTORS document.
  • The change has been fully tested:
    • I have added tests to cover my changes.
    • All new and existing tests passed.
    • I have checked that this change does not introduce memory leaks.
    • I have used Valgrind or similar tools to check for potential issues.
  • I have given due consideration to all of the following potential concerns:
    • Scalability
    • Performance
    • Security
    • Thread-safety
    • Cloud-compatibility
    • Premature optimization
    • Existing deployed queries will not be broken
    • This change fixes the problem, not just the symptom
    • The target branch of this pull request is appropriate for such a change.
  • There are no similar instances of the same problem that should be addressed
    • I have addressed them here
    • I have raised JIRA issues to address them separately
  • This is a user interface / front-end modification
    • I have tested my changes in multiple modern browsers
    • The component(s) render as expected

Smoketest:

  • Send notifications about my Pull Request position in Smoketest queue.
  • Test my draft Pull Request.

Testing:

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

Jira Issue: https://hpccsystems.atlassian.net//browse/HPCC-33526

Jirabot Action Result:
Assigning user: tim.klemm@lexisnexisrisk.com
Workflow Transition To: Merge Pending
Updated PR

asselitx
asselitx approved these changes Mar 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@asselitx asselitx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Possibly a few small stylistic and print formatting changes to make if you'd like but the important parts look good.

testing/unittests/datamaskingtests.cpp Outdated
e->Release();
CPPUNIT_FAIL(VStringBuffer("exception checking compatibility [%s]", msg.str()).str());
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the loggingtests change you weren't calling .str() on all your inline VStringBuffers. Why change here? Maybe a consistent approach is best? Or is it getting confused about which cast operator to apply in some situations?

Ultimately you could keep it as-is, this is a small question of style.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The difference may be related to Copilot predicting something that is technically correct but may not be what I would normally do.

testing/unittests/datamaskingtests.cpp Outdated
failed = true;
}
}
CPPUNIT_ASSERT_MESSAGE(VStringBuffer("missing expected %s '%s'", label, v.c_str()).str(), actual.find(v) != actual.end());
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wasn't this comparison wrong in the old test? find(v) != end() means that it was found because find(v) == end() means it wasn't found. Nothing to do here but curious....

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is something to do. Two test suite classes, each with a version of this. One asserts equality (wrong) and one asserts inequality (correct).

All tests pass, regardless of condition. Proved the methods are entered by forcing each to fail as the last line. It looks like no tests are exercising this potential failure.

testing/unittests/datamaskingtests.cpp Outdated
{
fprintf(stdout, "\n%s: hasProperties() mismatch\n", currentTest);
CPPUNIT_ASSERT(false);
CPPUNIT_ASSERT_MESSAGE(VStringBuffer("setProperty(\"%s\", \"foo\"", name).str(), context->setProperty(name, "foo"));
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Small but missing close paren in VStringBuffer

@timothyklemm timothyklemm requested a review from asselitx March 5, 2025 20:08
HPCC-33526: Update datamaskingtests failure identification and reporting
df95b79 
Use framework assertion macros to identify and report failures.
- Do not throw exceptions to signal failure.
- Do not report failures using [f]printf.
- Improve accuracy of failure reporting.
- Eliminate overhead associated with manual failure logging.

Signed-off-by: Tim Klemm <Tim.Klemm@lexisnexisrisk.com>
@timothyklemm timothyklemm force-pushed the hpcc-33526-datamaskingtests branch from 0759343 to df95b79 Compare March 10, 2025 11:00
@timothyklemm
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ghalliday please merge

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@asselitx asselitx asselitx approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@timothyklemm @asselitx