Remove dead testing code #784
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
akx
force-pushed
the
remove-dead-test-code
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0aff454
to
fb85b12
Compare
PierreF
approved these changes
Dec 31, 2023
Signed-off-by: Aarni Koskela <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aarni Koskela <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aarni Koskela <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aarni Koskela <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aarni Koskela <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aarni Koskela <[email protected]>
akx
force-pushed
the
remove-dead-test-code
branch
from
b223bc3
to
dc181bd
Compare
|
@PierreF Rebased 👍 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR removes a bunch of dead testing code (that was added in a155a87 but never used thereafter?) and splits the
tests.paho_testmodule into slightly more manageable pieces.It would be nice to refactor things altogether so there wouldn't be duplicate packet generation code in the library itself and separately again in the testing code, but by the looks of it, that's going to take some serious untangling.