Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add more unit tests for get_public_key operation #567

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 27, 2024

Conversation

tcoratger
Copy link
Collaborator

Description

This pull request enhances the test coverage of the get_public_key implementation by adding more unit tests. These additional tests cover a wider range of scenarios to ensure the robustness and correctness of the function.

Changes

  • Added additional unit tests for the get_public_key function.
  • Utilized a list of precomputed address pairs available here to expand the test coverage.
  • Improved the reliability and completeness of the test suite.

Purpose

The purpose of this pull request is to strengthen the testing suite for the get_public_key function, thereby increasing confidence in its behavior and ensuring that it functions correctly across a wider range of inputs.

@xJonathanLEI
Copy link
Owner

Thanks for the PR! More tests == better. The test_get_public_keys_from_json is failing though, as it tries to perform file system operations in WASM. You can change to use include_str! (which IMO is better for tests) instead.

@tcoratger
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks for the PR! More tests == better. The test_get_public_keys_from_json is failing though, as it tries to perform file system operations in WASM. You can change to use include_str! (which IMO is better for tests) instead.

@xJonathanLEI Done

@xJonathanLEI
Copy link
Owner

Rebasing for CI.

@xJonathanLEI xJonathanLEI merged commit f7d64dd into xJonathanLEI:master Mar 27, 2024
26 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants