Repository navigation
test(parity): validate recovery forecast output schema - #57
Merged
Merged
Conversation
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
RecoveryForecaster.forecast/6RED evidence
Before the validator,
test_recovery_forecast_exact_schema_rejects_common_mode_missing_fieldfailed because noParityFormatErrorwas raised when both sides omittedlow.Verification
python3 -m unittest discover -s Tools/tests -v(113 tests)python3 -m unittest discover -s Tools -p "test_*.py" -v(59 tests)python3 Tools/parity_ledger.pypython3 Tools/parity_ratchet.py ratchet --base 03c9f84c38a717fb1aedc60cd010dc0cc9b7ad15 --offlinepython3 -m py_compile Tools/parity_diff.py Tools/tests/test_parity_diff.pygit diff --checkNo native/production code changed and no native builds were required.