Skip to content

Conversation

webmaster128
Copy link
Member

Continuation of the work from #1809

@webmaster128 webmaster128 force-pushed the pending-tests-follow-up branch from e4d57fc to 8ad6506 Compare October 8, 2025 08:58
@webmaster128 webmaster128 merged commit 54e9b42 into main Oct 8, 2025
13 checks passed
@webmaster128 webmaster128 deleted the pending-tests-follow-up branch October 8, 2025 09:10
Comment on lines +879 to 881
(tendermintEnabled ? describe : xdescribe)("With WebsocketClient", () => {
// don't print out WebSocket errors if marked pending
const onError = globalThis.process?.env.TENDERMINT_ENABLED ? console.error : () => 0;
Copy link
Contributor

@dynst dynst Oct 8, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good news, this ternary-operator line (and similar lines in 3 other tests) can be deleted now that xdescribe() skips running this test code entirely, it can just use console.error directly.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

true story

Comment on lines 851 to +854
describe("Tendermint37Client", () => {
const { url, expected } = tendermintInstances[37];

it("can connect to a given url", async () => {
pendingWithoutTendermint();

(tendermintEnabled ? it : xit)("can connect to a given url", async () => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This could all be simplified just to use xdescribe() for all these tests instead of modifying every test to use xit(), right?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, we can probably move the check one level up.

I think all functionality that does not require a running backend should be pulled out of the Tendermint37Client into lower level code – in case something like that exists


beforeAll(async () => {
if (tendermintEnabled()) {
if (tendermintEnabled) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is basically if (true) after this PR, so the if statement could be removed.

});

describe("connectionStatus", () => {
(enabled ? describe : xdescribe)("connectionStatus", () => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for catching this. Not sure why the tests were even passing on #1809 if this test wasn't being skipped.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

They did not pass if no Tendermint backend is running. I got the failure locally. But in CI we always have Tendermint running.

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.

2 participants