Codegass opened a new pull request, #10537:
URL: https://github.com/apache/dubbo/pull/10537

   ## What is the purpose of the change
   FIX #10487
   
   This PR proposes a minor improvement that could apply to two test cases in 
`AppResponseTest`(`testSetExceptionWithEmptyStackTraceException` and 
`testAppResponseWithEmptyStackTraceException`). I will use 
[testSetExceptionWithEmptyStackTraceException](https://github.com/apache/dubbo/blob/a4052563b779ba0ee8a67eb717b4060698b6960a/dubbo-rpc/dubbo-rpc-api/src/test/java/org/apache/dubbo/rpc/AppResponseTest.java#L67-L78)
 as an example.
   ```java
           Throwable throwable = buildEmptyStackTraceException();
           if (throwable == null) {
               return;
           }
   ```
   On line 
[68-71](https://github.com/apache/dubbo/blob/a4052563b779ba0ee8a67eb717b4060698b6960a/dubbo-rpc/dubbo-rpc-api/src/test/java/org/apache/dubbo/rpc/AppResponseTest.java#L68-L71),
 it uses an if condition to check if a precondition is violated, i.e. 
“buildEmptyStackTraceException fail to construct NPE” If so, the test case 
return silently without any further execution. There could be two drawbacks to 
this:
   
   1. The if and return make the logic of the test case implicit
   2. It may still be worthwhile to execute the test case and see what happens.
   
   The assume function, introduced after JUnit 4&5 is designed to check for 
test pre-condition. As [mentioned in the JUnit 5's 
document](https://junit.org/junit5/docs/5.0.0/api/org/junit/jupiter/api/Assumptions.html):
   
   Assume functions is a set of methods useful for stating assumptions about 
the conditions in which a test is meaningful. A failed assumption does not mean 
the code is broken, but that the test provides no useful information.
   The if block could be replaced by After refactoring:
   ```java
           Throwable throwable = buildEmptyStackTraceException();
           assumeFalse(throwable == null);
   ```
   This makes the logic more explicit. Although this is a minor change, it can 
be applied to the two test cases in this `AppResponseTest `.
   
   ## Brief changelog
   Replace `if (throwable == null) {return;}` with `assumeFalse(throwable == 
null);` for better code comprehension.
   
   ## Verifying this change
   
   
   <!-- Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly 
and easily: -->
   
   ## Checklist
   - [x] Make sure there is a 
[GitHub_issue](https://github.com/apache/dubbo/issues) field for the change 
(usually before you start working on it). Trivial changes like typos do not 
require a GitHub issue. Your pull request should address just this issue, 
without pulling in other changes - one PR resolves one issue.
   - [x] Each commit in the pull request should have a meaningful subject line 
and body.
   - [x] Write a pull request description that is detailed enough to understand 
what the pull request does, how, and why.
   - [ ] Check if is necessary to patch to Dubbo 3 if you are work on Dubbo 2.7
   - [ ] Write necessary unit-test to verify your logic correction, more mock a 
little better when cross module dependency exist. If the new feature or 
significant change is committed, please remember to add sample in [dubbo 
samples](https://github.com/apache/dubbo-samples) project.
   - [ ] Add some description to 
[dubbo-website](https://github.com/apache/dubbo-website) project if you are 
requesting to add a feature.
   - [x] GitHub Actions works fine on your own branch.
   - [ ] If this contribution is large, please follow the [Software Donation 
Guide](https://github.com/apache/dubbo/wiki/Software-donation-guide).
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to