Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fix tests failing without the fancy feature #89

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Fix tests failing without the fancy feature #89

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
176e3e3
only run fancy example in tests with fancy feature
LordMZTE Oct 15, 2021
edf86da
add workflow step to test without fancy feature
LordMZTE Oct 15, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions .github/workflows/ci.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -43,5 +43,6 @@ jobs:
- name: Clippy
run: cargo clippy --all -- -D warnings
- name: Run tests
run: cargo test --all --verbose
run: cargo test --all --verbose --features fancy

1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -384,6 +384,7 @@ of falling back to your own custom handler.
Usage is like so:

```rust
#[cfg(feature = "fancy")]
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think this is the right thing to do. If someone were to copy-paste this snippet, they would be conditionalizing their set_hook based on their own fancy feature, not miette's.

I think the fix for this is trickier than we're thinking and tbh I'm not opposed to the fix being "tests don't work without --all-features"

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good point! I'm not sure about this, since I don't think theres a better way to fix this error, but on the other hand I also think it'd be great if tests would pass regardless of the feature flags. Maybe we could add a comment explaining that the attribute is only there so tests pass? If you don't think this needs to be changed, feel free to close the issue and PR :D

Copy link
Contributor

@dvermd dvermd Oct 18, 2021 •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I also ran into this error. One way to do it is to remove the #[cfg(feature = "fancy")] in lib.rs

#[cfg(feature = "fancy")]
pub use handler::*;

and to spread it in handler.rs to have a MietteHandlerOpts available without the fancy feature and be able to configure the footer and context_lines when building a NarratableReportHandler.

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That seems like a better idea!

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems like that implementation would require a bunch of changes around miette. I'm also not sure how clean that would be, as it would require about 16 cfg attributes in handler.rs. Also, we'd probably have to make some dependencies that are currently only needed on the fancy feature be always required.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Here are some ways that may lead to less cfg attributes:

  1. Create guarded impl blocks
  • remove the pub(crate) from the members of MietteHandlerOpts
  • split the impl MietteHandlerOpts with on one side footer and context_lines and the other one guarded by a #[cfg(feature = "fancy")]
  • now for build:
    • create build_narrated and a build_graphical functions. The second one going in the guarded impl bloc
    • spread/duplicate build in 2 impl blocks one guarded and one when fancy is not active that calls the 2 new functions
  1. Delegate the builders to Narrated and Graphical and have MietteHandlerOpts just be a facade.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@LordMZTE do you still work on this one ?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well, I'm not sure how to continue with this, or if this is something we should even worry about.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
#[cfg(feature = "fancy")]
# #[cfg(feature = "fancy")]

Would hide the cfg attribute in the generated documentation, avoiding the copy/paste issue. Still results in the test being silently ignored when the fancy feature isn't enabled, which I'm not sure is desirable, since set_hook is available either way.

If we go the route of "tests don't work without --all-features" , it would be nice if there was a clearer indication of why the tests are failing. When I first started looking at this project, I was definitely confused by the failing tests, and it took a bit to find the relevant part in CONTRIBUTING.md that explained it.

Something like this:

#[cfg(all(test, not(feature = "fancy")))]
compile_error!("Tests only work with the 'fancy' feature enabled. Try 'cargo test --features fancy'.");

miette::set_hook(Box::new(|_| {
Box::new(miette::MietteHandlerOpts::new()
.terminal_links(true)
Expand Down