Simplify writing tests for how rounds should end #107
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I think we're going to want to write quite a few test cases about how a round should end given some state. This PR adds an
expectRoundOutcomefunction that takes care of advancing the round until the expected final tick and then expect it to end in the specified way.The new
Spawning _ _case (which is implicitly covered by the deleted_case) is a bit weird: a round should never re-enter that state, so why do we even have to consider it as a possible outcome of a tick? Maybe something to improve going forward.💡
git show --ignore-space-change