Fixes the probe arity in sabotage notes - #125
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Two sabotage notes in the migrator run test named `probe/2`: the one above "a second run finds every row already in the target state" and the one above "a second adoption pass finds the row already backfilled". The function they mutate is the private `probe/3` in Encryptor.Ecto.Migrator.Pass; both notes now say so. `load_probe/2` is a different function and is untouched. Test comments only; no library change and no fragment. Refs: ece-ihf
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Two sabotage notes in
test/encryptor/ecto/migrator_run_test.exsnamedprobe/2: the note above "a second run finds every row already in the target state" and the note above "a second adoption pass finds the row already backfilled". The function both mutations target is the privateprobe/3inEncryptor.Ecto.Migrator.Pass(its@spec probe(t(), MapSet.t(identity()), binary() | nil)); both notes now sayprobe/3.load_probe/2is a different function and is untouched.Test comments only; no library change and no changelog fragment (the fragment README excludes test harness changes).
Checks
grep -rn "probe/2" test/returns nothing on this branch; before the change it returned the two notes above.load_probe/2appears inlib/anddocs/the same number of times as on main, and never intest/.mix qualitygreen on the committed tree, database arm included: 891 of 891 tests passed, Credo, docs and Dialyzer clean. The committed tree is byte-identical to the tree the gate ran on.Review
In-turn review, gate tier: the diff is two comment lines in one test file and touches no contract surface. I re-read both notes against
Pass: the first mutation (answer:not_targetunconditionally) is a change toprobe/3's clauses, and the second (read the source column instead of the target) is a change to the valueprobe/3is handed, soprobe/3is the right name in both. Everyprobe/mention left in the moduledoc and ADR-0002 already carries arity 3 or namesload_probe/2correctly.