Implemented test for unauthenticated input notes #408
Conversation
# Conflicts: # crates/block-producer/src/test_utils/store.rs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this looks good though I'm not 100% familiar with all the corner cases yet.
I left a few test naming nits/suggestions - feel free to ignore since its a style thing, but will elaborate below.
In general the tests name the condition being tested, but not the expected result. So as someone unfamiliar with the code I need to read the test carefully to know what's happening.
As an example:
fn missing_notes()versus
fn block_with_missing_notes_is_rejected()
Co-authored-by: Mirko von Leipzig <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good! Thank you! I left a coupe of comments inline - but they are all pretty minor.
One general thing (not specific to this PR): I find tests in this repo pretty hard to read and follow. We should probably start thinking about refactoring of the testing framework soon. Let's create an issue for this.
| #[cfg(test)] | ||
| mod tests { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: let's add TESTS section separator above this line.
| fn test_output_note_tracker_duplicate_output_notes() { | ||
| let mut txs = mock_proven_txs(); | ||
|
|
||
| OutputNoteTracker::new(&txs).unwrap(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does this line do here? Are we just making sure that the set of transactions returned from mock_proven_txs() is valid? If so, we should document this, or maybe even have a separate test for this.
| assert_eq!(batch.input_notes.len(), expected_input_notes.len()); | ||
| assert_eq!(batch.input_notes, expected_input_notes); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The check for the lengths to match seems a bit redundant as if the actual vectors don't match, the lengths won't match either.
We implemented unauthenticated input notes support in these PRs: #390 and #396.
We need to add tests to make sure the unauthenticated note handling in the whole pipeline (from posting transaction to block building) works as expected.
I've also refactored some methods and improved some mocks needed for tests.
One of tests fails at the moment, will try to find a bug.
Resolves #398