Improve Test Coverage for Auto Sizes Plugin #1879
Conversation
sarthak-19
changed the title
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## trunk #1879 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 66.70% 70.01% +3.30%
==========================================
Files 88 84 -4
Lines 7029 6973 -56
==========================================
+ Hits 4689 4882 +193
+ Misses 2340 2091 -249
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
sarthak-19
requested review from
joemcgill and
mukeshpanchal27
as code owners
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the Unlinked AccountsThe following contributors have not linked their GitHub and WordPress.org accounts: @[email protected]. Contributors, please read how to link your accounts to ensure your work is properly credited in WordPress releases. If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
westonruter
added
[Plugin] Enhanced Responsive Images
| @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ function auto_sizes_prime_attachment_caches( $content ): string { | |||
| */ | |||
| function auto_sizes_filter_image_tag( $content, array $parsed_block, WP_Block $block ): string { | |||
| if ( ! is_string( $content ) ) { | |||
| return ''; | |||
| return ''; // @codeCoverageIgnore | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ditto. I don't think this should be ignored because technically this is a code path that can be tested.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The assertion to test for with auto_sizes_prime_attachment_caches() is a bit tricky though. For one, an assertion can assert that the input $content is identical to the return value. But then otherwise, when there is a class with an attachment ID in it or no class attribute at all, then this means _prime_post_caches() is called or not. I guess you could check to see if a query was done on the DB or not?
| public function test_auto_sizes_prime_attachment_caches_with_empty_class(): void { | ||
| $img_tag = '<img src="https://example.com/foo.png">'; | ||
|
|
||
| $result = auto_sizes_prime_attachment_caches( $img_tag ); | ||
|
|
||
| // Assert that the output is the same as the input since no processing should occur. | ||
| $this->assertSame( $img_tag, $result ); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note that this test doesn't actually test that the attachment caches were primed. Ideally there would be a data provider for this, one which tells the test function to create an attachment and get the image HTML for it via wp_get_attachment_image(). In this case, it should assert somehow that _prime_post_caches() was called. Then there could be another case in the data provider for an external image without a class attribute as you have here, and in this case it should assert that _prime_post_caches() was not called.
Summary
This is part of #1789:
@coversAnnotationscc : @westonruter