chore(tui): add test for key handling #9558
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
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
8 Skipped Deployments
|
chris-olszewski
commented
Dec 4, 2024
| ) { | ||
| match (translate_key_event(opts, key_event), expected) { | ||
| (Some(actual), Some(expected)) => { | ||
| assert_eq!(mem::discriminant(&actual), mem::discriminant(&expected)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mem::discriminant takes an enum and gives each variant an ID that can be compared. This is a workaround for the fact that currently our events can not be compared.
We might want to eventually add that #[derive(PartialEq)] to Event, but the fact that our events contain file descriptors or channels makes it non-obvious as to what behavior should be in that scenario.
anthonyshew
approved these changes
Dec 4, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
Before I realized that #9543 already fixed #9553 I started working on a unit test for this section of the code. Putting it up just so writing future tests should be easier.
Testing Instructions
Unit test runs and passes.