On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 1:01 PM Florents Tselai <florents.tse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 12:51 PM Jim Jones <jim.jo...@uni-muenster.de> > wrote: > >> On 10.06.25 15:37, Florents Tselai wrote: >> > EDIT: There are test under `src/psql/t` , not sure though how much >> > coverage they have, >> > but most importantly how it’d look like for this case. >> >> I took a look at these files, but I'm still unsure how to use them for >> automated prompt checking - I'm not super familiar with the perl tests, >> to be honest. >> > > From Tom at the discord channel > > * Yeah, you can see from the code coverage report [1] that > session_username() isn't reached in our tests. It's only used if the psql > prompt string is set to use it, and testing that in an interesting way is > kind of hard --- our standard regression-script framework doesn't expose > prompt output. On balance I'm not sure that covering session_username() > would be worth the test cycles. [1] > https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/bin/psql/common.c.gcov.html > <https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/bin/psql/common.c.gcov.html>* > > So, yes I don't think we can auto-test it really, thus we'll have to rely > on these simple functional tests. > Absent any other feedback I'm marking this as Ready for Committer; Said committer can push back on my arbitrary %S selection https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5808/
