-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30.1k
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: update test-crypto-aes-wrap to use node:test #55110
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #55110 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 88.25% 88.24% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 651 651
Lines 183871 183871
Branches 35859 35851 -8
==========================================
- Hits 162271 162248 -23
- Misses 14895 14905 +10
- Partials 6705 6718 +13 |
Why? |
As I've discussed in other threads I'm working incrementally on trying to make our tests more structured so that they are easier to understand and easier to port/run in other environments. This is part of that effort. |
const crypto = require('crypto'); | ||
// Disabling the unnecessary lint rule here. We're testing the common.hasCrypto | ||
// in the skip option of the describe block. | ||
/* eslint-disable node-core/crypto-check */ |
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.
I wonder why don't we just skip crypto on the python runner? This would avoid spawning those threads?
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.
Likely worthwhile.
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.
I would like to see an official TSC vote/decision on this which is not made for Cloudflare/workerd interests. It is like we go to another project and start making changes to their tests (with all the drawbacks that this might have for that project) so that it is easier for us to use their tests. That seems silly to me.
I suspect it would be easier to review this kind of PR if there was some guide that explains what makes a test "less portable". |
No description provided.