Improve unpredictable parallel stdout test case

[gaborcsardi]

Assemble messages from each worker separately before testing.

[claude]

Claude finished @gaborcsardi's task —— View job

---

Code Review Complete ✅

I've analyzed the changes in tests/testthat/test-parallel-stdout.R and here's my comprehensive review:

Review Tasks:

• Read repository context and guidelines
• Analyze the modified test file
• Check code quality and best practices
• Look for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Check for security concerns
• Assess test coverage and effectiveness

Summary of Changes

The PR improves a parallel stdout test by:

• Introducing an assemble_msgs() helper function to extract and combine messages from specific test files
• Testing both "summary" and "progress" reporters in a loop instead of duplicating code
• Simplifying the expectations to match assembled messages directly

Code Review Feedback

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

• Excellent refactoring: The new approach is much cleaner and more maintainable
• Good DRY principle: Eliminates code duplication between the two reporter tests
• Clear helper function: assemble_msgs() has a single responsibility and clear purpose
• Consistent naming: Function and variable names are descriptive and follow R conventions

✅ Bug Fixes & Reliability

• Addresses unpredictability: The PR title mentions "unpredictable" behavior - this approach should be more reliable because:
  • It assembles messages from each worker separately before testing
  • Uses exact string matching with fixed = TRUE instead of relying on order
  • Removes the all = FALSE parameter that could make tests flaky
• Better isolation: Each test file's output is processed independently

🔍 Potential Issues

1. Hardcoded test names: The approach relies on hardcoded test file names ("test-stdout-2.R", "test-stdout-3.R")

   • Consider making this more dynamic if test files might be renamed
   • Current approach is fine for stable test fixtures

2. Error handling: The assemble_msgs() function doesn't handle edge cases:

   # What if no messages match the prefix?
   parts <- sub(...) # Could return character(0)
   paste(parts, collapse = "") # Returns ""

   This might actually be desired behavior, but worth noting.

✅ Performance Considerations

• Better performance: Single test execution per reporter instead of duplicated runs
• Efficient string operations: Uses vectorized grep() and sub() operations
• Reduced I/O: Fewer calls to capture.output() and test_local()

✅ Security Concerns

• No security issues identified
• Test code operates in sandboxed environment
• Uses standard testthat testing patterns

✅ Test Coverage & Effectiveness

• Maintains coverage: Tests the same functionality as before
• More robust testing: Less likely to fail due to output ordering issues
• Clear intent: The assembled messages approach makes it obvious what's being tested
• Good test structure: Follows testthat conventions with descriptive test names

Recommendations

1. Consider adding a comment explaining why messages are assembled separately:

   # Assemble messages from each worker separately to avoid order-dependent tests
   assemble_msgs <- function(txt, test_name) {

2. Optional: Add defensive programming if you want to handle edge cases:

   assemble_msgs <- function(txt, test_name) {
     prefix <- paste0("> ", test_name, ": ")
     matching_lines <- grep(prefix, out, fixed = TRUE, value = TRUE)
     if (length(matching_lines) == 0) return("")
     # ... rest of function
   }

Overall Assessment

This is a high-quality improvement that addresses the unpredictability mentioned in the PR title. The code is cleaner, more maintainable, and should be more reliable in CI environments where parallel test output order can vary.

Recommendation: Approve ✅

The changes follow testthat's testing patterns, improve reliability, and maintain test coverage while reducing code duplication.

---