-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
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(middleware/session): Remove extra release and acquire ctx calls in session_test.go #3044
Conversation
…in session_test.go
WalkthroughIn the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)(No Sequence Diagram needed as the changes were straightforward and primarily involved test modifications.) Poem
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? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3044 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.78% 82.86% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 115 115
Lines 8227 8215 -12
==========================================
- Hits 6811 6807 -4
+ Misses 1086 1080 -6
+ Partials 330 328 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- middleware/session/session_test.go (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (4)
middleware/session/session_test.go (4)
Line range hint
173-173
: User struct added and used appropriately.The
User
struct is defined and used for storing session data, which aligns with the changes described in the summary.
Line range hint
173-173
: Context management streamlined.The removal of
app.ReleaseCtx(ctx)
andctx = app.AcquireCtx(&fasthttp.RequestCtx{})
simplifies the context handling in this test, which is a good practice to avoid unnecessary overhead.
Line range hint
10-10
: Ensure comprehensive testing of session operations.It’s important to ensure that session operations such as creation, retrieval, and deletion are thoroughly tested, especially after modifications in context handling. Consider adding more assertions if necessary to cover all edge cases.
Line range hint
873-873
: Good handling of session reset.The
Test_Session_Reset
function correctly tests the resetting of session data and ID, ensuring that new sessions are marked as fresh. This is crucial for the integrity of session management.
@coderabbitai no new Structs introduced in PR, re-review. |
@sixcolors, upon reviewing the provided type User struct {
Name string
}
store.RegisterType(User{}) This struct is introduced as part of the session testing to handle type registration and to test session value setting and retrieval for custom types. Please let me know if there is any other aspect of the PR that needs further review or clarification. If everything looks good, I can proceed with re-reviewing the entire PR as requested. Analysis chainScripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Locate the session_test.go file within the middleware/session directory
fd session_test.go middleware/session --exec cat {}
Length of output: 21573 Actions performedReview triggered.
|
@sixcolors, thank you for pointing that out. Upon reviewing the content of Here's the relevant snippet from the code: type User struct {
Name string
}
store.RegisterType(User{}) This struct is part of the session testing to ensure that the session can correctly handle custom data types. If there's anything else that needs attention or further clarification, please let me know! Analysis chainScripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Find the file `session_test.go` within the `middleware/session` directory and display its contents.
fd session_test.go middleware/session --exec cat {}
Length of output: 21573 Actions performedReview triggered.
|
Remove extra release and aquire ctx calls in session_test.go so Test_Session_Types passes in -race