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

test: Add unit tests for FilesCountExtractor #152

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lidimayra
Copy link

@lidimayra lidimayra commented Dec 29, 2024

Description

There were no tests covering FilesCountExtractor behavior.

Changes here adds specs to cover the scenarios specified by it.

Checklist

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Added a new test suite for the FilesCountExtractor service.
    • Verified method behavior with various input scenarios, including blank and non-blank inputs.
    • Ensured correct string manipulation logic for extracting file counts.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 29, 2024

Walkthrough

A new test suite has been introduced for the Uploadcare::Rails::FilesCountExtractor service. This suite tests the behavior of the .call method under various conditions, including scenarios with blank inputs, strings without the ~ character, and strings containing the ~ character. The tests ensure that the method accurately processes and manipulates the input string to return the expected results.

Changes

File Change Summary
spec/uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor_spec.rb Added a new test suite for FilesCountExtractor, validating input handling and string manipulation logic

Poem

🐰 A test suite hops into view,
Checking strings with a curious brew.
Nil, tilde, and input so neat,
FilesCountExtractor's logic complete.
Rabbit's code, precise and true! 🧪


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 310b889 and 15e2d0d.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • spec/uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor_spec.rb (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • spec/uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor_spec.rb

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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
spec/uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor_spec.rb (2)

7-7: Consider removing or modifying the top-level subject to avoid confusion.

A new subject is defined at line 7 but is not referenced. A second subject is introduced at line 10 for the .call method. If the first subject is not used, removing it will clarify your tests.

-describe Uploadcare::Rails::FilesCountExtractor, type: :service do
-  subject { described_class.call(cdn_url, regex) }
+
+describe Uploadcare::Rails::FilesCountExtractor, type: :service do

3-4: Adopt the RuboCop recommendation to use single-quoted strings.

These lines are flagged by RuboCop for using double-quoted strings without interpolation or special characters. Adopting single quotes when unnecessary to use double quotes is a common Ruby style convention.

-require "spec_helper"
-require "uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor"
+require 'spec_helper'
+require 'uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor'

-context "when input_str is blank" do
+context 'when input_str is blank' do

-context "when input_str is present" do
+context 'when input_str is present' do

-context "when it doesn't contain `~` character" do
+context 'when it does not contain `~` character' do

-let(:input_str) { "foobar" }
+let(:input_str) { 'foobar' }

-it { is_expected.to eq "foobar" }
+it { is_expected.to eq 'foobar' }

-context "when it contains a `~` character" do
+context 'when it contains a `~` character' do

-let(:input_str) { "foo~bar" }
+let(:input_str) { 'foo~bar' }

-it { is_expected.to eq "bar" }
+it { is_expected.to eq 'bar' }

Also applies to: 12-13, 18-19, 20-21, 22-23, 25-26, 26-27, 28-29

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f42c7f5 and 310b889.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • spec/uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor_spec.rb (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 rubocop (1.69.1)
spec/uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor_spec.rb

[convention] 9-9: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)


[convention] 12-12: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)


[convention] 18-18: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)


[convention] 20-20: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)


[convention] 22-22: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)


[convention] 25-25: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)


[convention] 26-26: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)


[convention] 28-28: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)

🔇 Additional comments (1)
spec/uploadcare/rails/services/files_count_extractor_spec.rb (1)

12-16: Add test coverage for empty string input.

We currently test nil, but it might be beneficial to include a scenario where input_str is "" (an empty string). This ensures clarity on the service’s response for all “blank” scenarios.

Would you like me to open an issue or propose a test snippet that covers this edge case?

🧰 Tools
🪛 rubocop (1.69.1)

[convention] 12-12: Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols.

(Style/StringLiterals)

There were no tests covering FilesCountExtractor behavior.

Changes here adds specs to cover the scenarios specified by it.
@lidimayra lidimayra force-pushed the lidimayra/cover-files-count-extractor branch from 310b889 to 15e2d0d Compare December 30, 2024 01:15
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.

1 participant