test(openchallenges): improve organization service model entity unit test coverage #2536
Conversation
|
PR is ready for review. Unit tests have been added for OrganizationService model/entity. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use a more descriptive title for the PR. E.g. be more specific about what part of the project you are modifying.
Let's use this simple use case to further improve how you write tests. The main limitation is that you only use assertEquals or assertNotEqual and this leads to superficial tests. Try to test for more specific general and edge cases, trigger errors, etc.
Consider below the improvement that ChatGPT suggests. Please review each of these suggestions and try to find an application for each of them by the time of our next meeting.
ChatGPT feedback
Prompt: Please review this unit test file written in Java. How could this file be improved?
<code>
Response:
This unit test file for the OrganizationCategoryEntity class in Java is well-structured and covers several aspects, including constructor behavior, getter methods, and the consistency of equals and hashCode methods. However, there are several areas where it can be improved for clarity, maintainability, and effectiveness:
-
Use Descriptive Test Method Names: The test method names are quite descriptive, but they could be improved to follow a more consistent pattern that explicitly states the expected outcome, the condition under which it's expected, and the specific method or scenario being tested.
-
Reduce Duplication: There's a noticeable amount of setup duplication, especially in the creation of
OrganizationCategoryEntityinstances. Consider utilizing a factory method or@ParameterizedTestwith different arguments to streamline the creation of test objects and reduce code duplication. -
Improve Assertions:
- Consider using more specific assertions where possible. For instance, instead of just
assertEquals, you could useassertThatcombined with matchers (e.g.,assertThat(contributor1.getCategory(), is(equalTo(category)));). This approach can make the assertions more readable and provide more detailed error messages. - It might be beneficial to add messages to assertions to explain the context or reason for the test, especially when the purpose of the test might not be immediately clear from the assertion itself.
- Consider using more specific assertions where possible. For instance, instead of just
-
Test Naming Convention: Adopt a more consistent naming convention for tests. For example, use a pattern like
methodName_StateUnderTest_ExpectedBehavior. This makes it easier to understand what each test is verifying at a glance. -
Leverage @DisplayName: Use
@DisplayNameannotations to give a human-readable description to your tests. This is particularly useful when you want to describe the test scenario in a way that the method name alone cannot convey. -
Check for Edge Cases: The current tests cover basic scenarios. Consider adding tests for edge cases, such as null inputs, invalid arguments, or boundary values for the methods being tested.
-
Separation of Concerns: Each test method currently tests multiple aspects. It's generally a good practice to have each test method focus on a single behavior or aspect of the class under test. This makes it easier to diagnose issues when a test fails because the failing test directly points to the problematic behavior.
-
Code Comments: While the setup method is somewhat self-explanatory, adding comments to explain the purpose behind certain test cases or the significance of specific test conditions can improve readability and maintainability, especially for more complex tests.
-
Mocking External Dependencies: If
OrganizationEntityor any other external dependencies become more complex and interact with external systems or have side effects, consider using mocks or stubs to isolate the tests better.
Improving these aspects can lead to a more maintainable, readable, and robust suite of unit tests, making it easier to understand the purpose of each test and diagnose issues when tests fail.
|
@tschaffter I have used chatGPT to update both java files included in this pr. |
|
|
|
|
|
@tschaffter Can you review this pr please? |
Description
Organization Service coverage goal of >50% percent addressed with this PR focused on improving overall coverage of model/entity.
Related Issue
Fixes # 2505
Changelog