test: fix 'checks' validation test for checkPrime#47139
Merged
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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
This test had two problems: * The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the 'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first argument should be valid for this particular test. * The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the validity of the 'checks' option was not verified. Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks' option are valid. Refs: nodejs#36997
nodejs-github-bot added needs-ci 
tniessen added crypto 
github-actionsbot removed the request-ci 
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Collaborator
nodejs-github-bot commented Mar 17, 2023
panva added the author ready 
panva approved these changes Mar 17, 2023
lpinca approved these changes Mar 17, 2023
23 tasks
tniessen added commit-queue 19 tasks
nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue Collaborator
nodejs-github-bot commented Mar 19, 2023
Landed in fbd526b |
This was referenced Mar 20, 2023
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 5, 2023
This test had two problems: * The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the 'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first argument should be valid for this particular test. * The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the validity of the 'checks' option was not verified. Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks' option are valid. Refs: #36997 PR-URL: #47139 Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Merged
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 7, 2023
This test had two problems: * The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the 'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first argument should be valid for this particular test. * The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the validity of the 'checks' option was not verified. Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks' option are valid. Refs: #36997 PR-URL: #47139 Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 6, 2023
This test had two problems: * The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the 'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first argument should be valid for this particular test. * The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the validity of the 'checks' option was not verified. Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks' option are valid. Refs: #36997 PR-URL: #47139 Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
This test had two problems:
ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPEerror -- the validity of thechecksoption was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first argument should be valid for this particular test.common.mustNotCall()was passed toassert.throws()as a third argument instead of being passed tocheckPrime()as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again led to the (expected)ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPEerror, but again, the validity of thechecksoption was not verified.Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the
checksoption are valid.Refs: #36997