increase coverage for setup app #12
Conversation
kswanson33
force-pushed
the
SHRMP-49/test-run-studies
branch
from
a12b9cf to
b7c1b55
Compare
kswanson33
force-pushed
the
SHRMP-49/test-run-studies
branch
from
b7c1b55 to
202a491
Compare
kswanson33
force-pushed
the
SHRMP-49/test-run-studies
branch
from
72830ef to
1b7e5af
Compare
src/lib/api.test.ts
Outdated
| import jwt from 'jsonwebtoken' | ||
|
|
||
| beforeEach(() => { | ||
| process.env.MANAGEMENT_APP_PRIVATE_KEY = 'mockprivatekeyvalue' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could these be set in the jest.env section in package.json?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🤔 @philschatz i think you left a similar comment on my test about using the jest setupFile feature, but i couldn't find a similar feature in vitest which we're using (i think referencing jest makes things a little more confusing since its not totally 1-1 with feature names or parity), i ended up taking this same approach for setting up/tearing down env variables here
i figure whatever we do in one place we should do in the other too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks buddies 🙏
src/lib/utils.ts
Outdated
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // returns given value with type certainty, or silently exchanges value if null or undefined | ||
| export const ensureValueWithExchange = <T>(value: T, exchange: NonNullable<T>): NonNullable<T> => { |
src/lib/utils.ts
Outdated
| if (runId !== undefined && !managementAppRunIds.includes(runId) && item.ResourceARN !== undefined) { | ||
| orphanTaskDefinitions.push(item.ResourceARN) | ||
| } | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| return orphanTaskDefinitions | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // returns given value with type certainty, or errors if value is null or undefined | ||
| export const ensureValueWithError = <T>(value: T, message?: string): NonNullable<T> => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| export const ensureValueWithError = <T>(value: T, message?: string): NonNullable<T> => { | |
| export const ensureValueWithError = <T>(value: T | undefined | null, message?: string): T => { |
Maybe easier to read... fewer negatives?
| const baseTaskDefinition = process.env.BASE_TASK_DEFINITION_FAMILY || '' | ||
| const subnets = process.env.VPC_SUBNETS || '' | ||
| const securityGroup = process.env.SECURITY_GROUP || '' | ||
| const cluster = ensureValueWithExchange(process.env.ECS_CLUSTER, '') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Switch most (all?) ensureValueWithExchange to be ensureValueWithError
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will address in SHRMP-51 (made a comment on the issue)
kswanson33
force-pushed
the
SHRMP-49/test-run-studies
branch
from
36c2e1f to
52efae5
Compare
| @@ -7,11 +7,10 @@ | |||
| "dev": "next dev", | |||
| "build": "next build", | |||
| "start": "next start", | |||
| "lint": "next lint && prettier --check .", | |||
| "lint:fix": "next lint --fix && prettier --write .", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
how come no more next lint? just curious
There was a problem hiding this comment.
next lint gives an error when those frontend files are removed (pages) and (apps)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so jealous you guys get to remove all your frontend files 😆
No description provided.