These are chat archives for dry-rb/chat

8th
May 2016
Luca Guidi
@jodosha
May 08 2016 10:28

@timriley @AMHOL Do you think it's a wise choice to move all the tests that I'm writing for hanami-v to dry-v? I can work on this huge PR, if you'll accept it. The current dry-v set of tests doesn't give you visibility on the effects of the production code changes. Each time I do bundle update I get the fixes that you merged (Thank you! :smile_cat: ), but also new failures ( :crying_cat_face: ).

These new failures deserve other GH tickets, by creating a slow feedback cycle: it will take days to notice the problem and a week to get it fixed. With the whole set of tests that I wrote, feedback is immediate and no broken code will be pushed. WDYT? :green_heart:

Tim Riley
@timriley
May 08 2016 10:46

@jodosha I think these makes sense as a high-level series of integration tests, yeah. Even though some the logic underpinning dry-v is spread around dry-logic and dry-types too, it feels like it’d be helpful to have something comprehensive to test how the 3 gems work toegether.

So I’d be in favour of something like this. Since Solnic is responding to GH issues, perhaps it’d be good to post one there just to see his opinion? To me it feels like a good idea to run it past him since he’s primary maintainer. A small delay is probably worth it for the consensus :)

Luca Guidi
@jodosha
May 08 2016 10:47

@timriley Thank you. The whole test suite for hanami-v has the following stats:

Finished in 3.764721s, 409.5921 runs/s, 751.4502 assertions/s.

1542 runs, 2829 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 81 skips

It shouldn't add too much burden to dry-v ;)

Tim Riley
@timriley
May 08 2016 10:48
Yeah. A worthwhile 3 seconds!
Thanks for your effort in putting this together, @jodosha :pray:
Luca Guidi
@jodosha
May 08 2016 10:49
@timriley :tophat:
Tim Riley
@timriley
May 08 2016 12:54
Next cab off the rank in my auto_inject improvements: making it all work through dry-component. dry-rb/dry-component#11 – feedback welcome!