-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 402
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
calc: improve help output, test coverage (now 100%) #2530
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ezpz, +1
Oops! All Error Cases! ...were not covered by the test suite. That was the easiest 100% ever.
Sopel displays only one example command if none of the examples is defined as `user_help=True`, and I believe these four happen to show off the most variety of usage in a suitably succinct way.
With apologies for the force-push, I had to rebase in order to make the wording change addressing @SnoopJ's stylistic concern over one error message. (Blame the merging of #2504.) Scout's honor that that was the only thing I changed, but this diff is small enough that you guys can definitely re-review it if you want between now and when it gets merged. |
These additional cases (and a new error handler) cover as much of the `tools.calculation` submodule as possible using the example decorator. Further coverage of `tools.calculation` would require real unit tests of the sort one finds in this project's `test/` directory.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Still LGTM!
Error cases weren't covered by the
@plugin.example
tests. Fixed that.Also declared a few more examples that should appear in the help output, to showcase more of the plugin's capabilities.
Follow-up to #2503 (comment).
Checklist
make qa
(runsmake lint
andmake test
)