feat(examples): yet another unit and file testing package p/jeronimoabi/expect

[jeronimoalbi]

The package expect provides testing support for packages and realms.

The opinionated approach taken on this package for testing is to use function chaining and semantics.

Focus is not on speed as there are other packages that would run tests faster like the official uassert or urequire packages.

Values can be asserted using the Value() function, for example:

func TestFoo(t *testing.T) {
  got := 42
  expect.Value(t, got).ToEqual(42)
  expect.Value(t, got).Not().ToEqual(0)

  expect.Value(t, "foo").ToEqual("foo")
  expect.Value(t, 42).AsInt().Not().ToBeGreaterThan(50)
  expect.Value(t, "TRUE").AsBoolean().ToBeTruthy()
}

Functions can also be used to assert returned values, errors or panics.

Package supports four type of functions:

• func()
• func() any
• func() error
• func() (any, error)

Functions can be asserted using the Func() function, for example:

func TestFoo(t *testing.T) {
  expect.Func(t, func() {
    panic("Boom!")
  }).ToPanic().WithMessage("Boom!")

  wantErr := errors.New("Boom!")
  expect.Func(t, func() error {
    return wantErr
  }).ToFail().WithMessage("Boom!")

  expect.Func(t, func() error {
    return wantErr
  }).ToFail().WithError(wantErr)
}

[Gno2D2]

🛠 PR Checks Summary

🔴 Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

Manual Checks (for Reviewers):

• IGNORE the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check)

Read More

🤖 This bot helps streamline PR reviews by verifying automated checks and providing guidance for contributors and reviewers.

✅ Automated Checks (for Contributors):

🔴 Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

☑️ Contributor Actions:

1. Fix any issues flagged by automated checks.
2. Follow the Contributor Checklist to ensure your PR is ready for review.
   • Add new tests, or document why they are unnecessary.
   • Provide clear examples/screenshots, if necessary.
   • Update documentation, if required.
   • Ensure no breaking changes, or include BREAKING CHANGE notes.
   • Link related issues/PRs, where applicable.

☑️ Reviewer Actions:

1. Complete manual checks for the PR, including the guidelines and additional checks if applicable.

📚 Resources:

• Report a bug with the bot.
• View the bot’s configuration file.

Debug

Automated Checks

Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 The base branch matches this pattern: ^master$
    └── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is a member of the team: tech-staff)

Then

🔴 Requirement not satisfied
└── 🔴 If
    ├── 🔴 Condition
    │   └── 🔴 Or
    │       ├── 🔴 At least 1 user(s) of the organization reviewed the pull request (with state "APPROVED")
    │       ├── 🔴 At least 1 user(s) of the team tech-staff reviewed pull request
    │       └── 🔴 This pull request is a draft
    └── 🔴 Else
        └── 🔴 And
            ├── 🟢 This label is applied to pull request: review/triage-pending
            ├── 🔴 At least 1 user(s) of the team tech-staff reviewed pull request
            └── 🔴 On no pull request

Manual Checks

**IGNORE** the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check)

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 On every pull request

Can be checked by

• Any user with comment edit permission

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!