Skip to content

Conversation

@KoxyG
Copy link

@KoxyG KoxyG commented Oct 4, 2024

What

Test files no longer needs sleep is no longer needed for test cases to pass.

Copy link
Member

@leighmcculloch leighmcculloch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @KoxyG! Thanks for contributing.

Can you make the following changes to the PR so we can merge?

  • Remove the refactors and minimise the change to the minimal changes required to fix the problem. Most of this PR seems to be a refactor, moving code around and not changing the functionality, which is unnecessary.

  • Remove the four dependencies added that are not used.

  • Re-add the test that got removed. We need to fix the problem without removing the test.

  • Undo the change to the contract address.

@willemneal
Copy link
Contributor

@leighmcculloch This issue was solved in the Loam repo by implementing what you suggested; adding some random bits to a Wasm binary so that each test has a unique contract. See https://github.com/loambuild/loam/pull/88/files#diff-0e64c49f07fd665cae565b5863129f04cebefe45e23d9afd9125411cc4dbd08cR74-R99

@KoxyG
Copy link
Author

KoxyG commented Oct 4, 2024

Hi @leighmcculloch i have made the neccessary changes. Kindly help review

@KoxyG
Copy link
Author

KoxyG commented Oct 5, 2024

@janewang kindly pls help review. This issue is referenced to this .

#1231 from ODhack

@sagpatil
Copy link
Contributor

sagpatil commented Dec 3, 2024

we will be closing this out if there is no activity for a week

@KoxyG
Copy link
Author

KoxyG commented Dec 4, 2024

we will be closing this out if there is no activity for a week

It's still under review. I haven't been updated about the progress of this by the reviewers.

Copy link
Member

@leighmcculloch leighmcculloch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm if the sleeps are no longer needed. I've approved the builds to run to see.

One question inline below.

Comment on lines +53 to +67
let result = e
.new_assert_cmd("contract")
.env(
"SOROBAN_CONTRACT_ID",
"CAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFCT4",
"CAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFCT4",
)
.arg("invoke")
.arg("--id")
.arg(id)
.arg("--")
.arg("hello")
.arg("--world=world")
.assert()
.stdout("[\"Hello\",\"world\"]\n");
.assert();

result.stdout("[\"Hello\",\"world\"]\n").success();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do these lines need to change? I see that a .success() has been added, and the stdout has been moved to after the .assert(). What's the significance of those changes?

@fnando fnando closed this Aug 14, 2025
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Needs Review to Done in DevX Aug 14, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants