XTend static checks of Wollok code don't have the same validations as a running Wollok environment

[matifreyre]

I modified this method in lang.wlk due to previous changes to indexOf:

    method contains(other) {
        try {
            return self.indexOf(other) >= 0
        } catch {
            return false
        }
    }

Notice how catch doesn't have a variable there. I didn't really need that variable, so I just tried it that way.

There is a test for contains that goes like this:

    @Test
    def void testContains() {
        '''
        assert.that("aguacate".contains("cat"))
        assert.that("aguacate".contains("agua"))
        assert.notThat("aguacate".contains("managua"))          
        '''.test
    }

This test passed perfectly, so I thought that that catch syntax was valid. test uses interpretPropagatingErrors and not interpretPropagatingErrorsWithoutStaticChecks.

But when I tried to use that same syntax in the Wollok environment, I got a static check that didn't allow me to. See this simple code:

    try {
        throw new Exception("text")
    } catch { 
        assert.that(true)
    }
    assert.fail("Error")

I didn't enable nor disable any check in the wollok environment, so I would expect to have the exact same checks. This case means there could be other tests that pass when they should fail.

[javierfernandes]

It is actually a parser lever error, no is not a custom static check. Probably the interpretPropagatingErrors method is not handling right this kind of parsing / linking errors (?)

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Matías Freyre notifications@github.com wrote:

I modified this method in lang.wlk due to previous changes to indexOf:

method contains(other) {
    try {
        return self.indexOf(other) >= 0
    } catch {
        return false
    }
}

Notice how catch doesn't have a variable there. I didn't really need that variable, so I just tried it that way.

There is a test for contains that goes like this:

@Test
def void testContains() {
    '''        assert.that("aguacate".contains("cat"))        assert.that("aguacate".contains("agua"))        assert.notThat("aguacate".contains("managua"))                  '''.test
}

This tests passed perfectly, so I thought that that catch syntax was valid. test uses interpretPropagatingErrors and not interpretPropagatingErrorsWithoutStaticChecks.

But when I tried to use that same syntax in the Wollok environment, I got a static check that didn't allow me to. See this simple code:

try {
    throw new Exception("text")
} catch {
    assert.that(true)
}
assert.fail("Error")

[image: image] https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10454118/16987354/1acbac3e-4e62-11e6-960a-b94dcd9fcd87.png

I didn't disable any check in the wollok environment, so I would expect to have the exact same checks. This case means there could be other tests that pass when they should fail.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/uqbar-project/wollok/issues/833, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEORWPkJbit36qN6Fp8fG7HNSdxN5eonks5qXiD9gaJpZM4JQxMf .

[tesonep]

The difference should be because the wrong code is in the library. I don't know how the tests is handling the errors in that. I will add a test to validate the content of the library

[tesonep]

I have added the test, but now there are a lot of errors. I will fix all the libraries.