On Wednesday, 27 March 2013 at 5:29 PM, Dieter Adriaenssens wrote:
Le 2013-03-23 11:07, Ayush Chaudhary a écrit :
Hi
On Saturday, 23 March 2013 at 8:24 PM, Marc Delisle wrote:
Le 2013-03-23 08:47, Ayush Chaudhary a écrit :
Hi,
Hello,
I was going through the existing tests. The test 'testIsHttps'
under test/classes/PMA_Config_test.php looks wrong as isHttps()
should be returning true for the second test case. However, the
function isHttps() uses a local static variable, which is why the
test is passing as in the construct, the PmaAbsoluteUri is
initialised with null and isHttps() is hence returning false in
all subsequent calls.
I am not sure why a local static variable was used here.
To avoid retesting the condition for nothing?
A better test for this method would be if we could reset the
static variable before each assertion. Since its a local static
variable, I couldn't find a proper way to reset the static
variable. Should we not move the static variable in the scope of
the class? In fact, even if we don't use a static variable, we
could just make is_https a class member and initialise it to NULL
in the constructor. This would eventually achieve the same result
in a neater way.
Makes sense, but watch out: isHttps() and detectHttps() are both
using $is_https, for different goals.
Also, what approach do we take for resetting static variables if
needed for unit testing? One thing I came across was using
Reflection_Helper::set_static_variable($class, $name,
$new_value)?
Yes, this approach seems interesting :
I think the purpose of the static variable is to only let isHttps()
execute once in the lifecycle of a PMA_Config object. Regarding, the
use of $is_https in detectHttps(), the copy of $is_https in
detectHttps() is completely independent of the one in isHttps()
because isHttps() creates a local copy of the variable. So
detectHttps() would not need to be changed at all.
Yes, but on a maintenance perspective, it's confusing to be using the
same variable in one file, with two different purposes.
Making $is_https a member variable and using the member variable in
isHttps() will help to make tests more exhaustive as we will be able
to test for 1. non-https input 2. https input 3. input when is_https
is already set (this is the only case that is being tested right
now)
Also, regarding that approach, the issue here is that the static copy
has scope only within the function isHttps(), so it does not seem
possible to reset it using Reflection_Helper.
Please let me know, if this would be fine. I can then write a quick
patch to fix this, and also improve testIsHttps()
Please do; I am not the OOP expert of the team ;)
I'm trying to figure out what is going on with $is_https in the
PMA_Config class. I'll have another look at the code later and do some
tests. I'll get back to you.
is_https isn't a member variable of the PMA_Config class, and I'm
wondering if it should be.
In detectHttps() $is_https is a local variable. (only defined in the
scope of this method) and this works.
In isHttps() $is_https is made static, forcing it to be remembered,
probably to avoid the behaviour as described in [0].
As I can see now, there are three things to be considered
1) use of static $is_https in isHttps() is not necessary -> it can be
replace by something else that makes more sense in an instanciated
class (like a class member variable, but because
$this->settings["is_https"] already exists, it makes sense to use this
one)
The issue with using $this->settings['is_https'] would be that
$this->settings['is_https'] is set by checkIsHttps() which in turn calls
isHttps() So if in any case, isHttps() is called independently, it might
cause issues. Since the purpose of static $is_https in isHttps() is
precisely to make sure that isHttps() only sets $is_https to true or false
only once in the life cycle of an object, we can have a class member like
'check_for_https' which is set to true in the constructor and then isHttps()
checks if its true or false and if its true, isHttps() executes further and
sets it to false.