aglinxinyuan opened a new pull request, #7833:
URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/pull/7833
### What changes were proposed in this PR?
Test-only. **No production file changes.**
Both templates here reached 100% in merged PRs #7681 and #7772, which lifted
these `.ts` files as a side effect — so what remained was branch arms and
uncalled handlers rather than whole untested regions. Measured with istanbul
JSON from `--coverage --coverage-reporters=json`, one spec at a time, identical
`--include` filter for the before and after runs:
**`dataset-detail.component.ts`**
| | before | after |
|---|---|---|
| statements | 425/430 (98.84%) | **428/430 (99.53%)** |
| branch arms | 177/203 (87.19%) | **193/203 (95.07%)** |
| functions | 115/120 (95.83%) | **120/120 (100%)** |
In the Codecov framing used in the issue: 5 missed lines + 24 partial → **2
missed + 9 partial**. 15 of the 24 partial lines are now fully covered. Closed
3 of 5 missed statement lines, **16 of 26 missed branch arms**, and **5 of 5
missed functions**. Its template is re-confirmed at 455/455 statements and
46/46 branch arms, so nothing was added there.
**`user-dataset-version-creator.component.ts`**
| | before | after |
|---|---|---|
| statements | 58/63 (92.06%) | **62/63 (98.41%)** |
| branch arms | 22/24 (91.67%) | **24/24 (100%)** |
| functions | 14/16 (87.50%) | 15/16 (93.75%) |
Codecov framing: 5 missed + 2 partial → **1 missed + 0 partial**.
Tests **188 → 214**: dataset-detail 173 → 192, version-creator 15 → 18, plus
the repair round below.
### An honest correction to the second target's count
The assessment called it 5 lines + 2 arms. The real closable count is **4
statements + 2 arms + 1 function**, because **one of its 5 missed lines is dead
code**: `get formControlNames(): string[]`. A repo-wide grep returns exactly
one hit — its own declaration — with no template and no TypeScript reference.
It is left uncovered deliberately rather than cemented; deleting the getter
belongs in a separate production PR.
### Verification
Review raised 14 findings across two lenses; the repair round took the suite
to 214 and every accepted finding was proved by running the reviewer's proposed
mutation first, then re-running after the fix to confirm it dies on the named
test.
Neither file is an instance of #7458 — no `TestBed.overrideComponent` in
either spec, which the non-zero starting percentages already implied.
One earlier misdiagnosis was deliberately **not** re-reported:
`dataset-detail.component.html:593`'s `[disabled]` binding does work. `NgModel`
routes it through `control.disable()`, deferred to a microtask, so the DOM lags
one turn behind `detectChanges()` — asserting immediately reads a stale value
and looks like an inert binding.
### Any related issues, documentation, discussions?
Closes #7832
### How was this PR tested?
```
npx ng test --watch=false --include="**/dataset-detail.component.spec.ts"
--include="**/user-dataset-version-creator.component.spec.ts"
```
```
Test Files 2 passed (2)
Tests 214 passed (214)
```
`yarn format:ci` exits 0; no `junit.xml` left behind.
### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Generated-by: Claude Code (Opus 5)
--
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]
