Re: [PATCH v3 04/12] dts: add mechanism to skip test cases or suites

[Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>]

On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 5:23 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
<snip>
> >> +    def _mark_results(self, result) -> None:
> >
> > Is it worth adding the type annotation for `result` here and to the
> > other places where this is implemented? I guess it doesn't matter that
> > much since it is a private method.
> >
>
> I didn't add it precisely because it's a private method and it's pretty
> self explanatory.

Makes sense.

>
> >> +        """Mark the result as well as the child result as `result`.
> >
> > Are these methods even marking their own result or only their
> > children? It seems like it's only really updating the children
> > recursively and its result would have already been updated before this
> > was called.
> >
>
> It's supposed to be just their result which is actually the result of
> the children in all but the TestCaseResult classes. Conceptually, each

Right, of course. Sorry, I was thinking too literally about this
isolated method, with the context that that's how the result of the
level itself is decided, this makes way more sense.

> results level should contains these:
> 1. the result of setup
> 2. the result of teardown
> 3. the result of the level itself (outside of setup and teardown)
>
> The result of the level itself is what's supposed to be set here. The
> thing is we're making the child results for non-test cases and the
> result of the test cases for test cases. Maybe I only need to update the
> docstring.

You probably don't even need to update the doc-string, this seems more
like a mistake on my part :).

>
> >>
> >>           The blocking of child results should be done in overloaded methods.
> >>           """
> > <snip>
> >>
>