-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
task/WP-100: Display all jobAttributes via getJobDisplayInformation #868
task/WP-100: Display all jobAttributes via getJobDisplayInformation #868
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #868 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 63.33% 63.34% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 428 428
Lines 12246 12250 +4
Branches 2518 2521 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 7756 7760 +4
Misses 4284 4284
Partials 206 206
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added some comments regarding structure of the code
client/src/utils/jobsUtil.js
Outdated
return true | ||
}) | ||
*/ | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are the concerns/suggestions in the comments covered by this PR? If so, they can likely be removed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added the comments Line 139 - 153 since the initial workaround to filter the parameters worked by finding the matchingParameter first and checking to see if it has a isHidden: true
property on the object. My solution (Line 63-69) just maps through the parameterSet.appArgs
object array and checks to see if the property isHidden
. (it doesn't need to find the matchingParameter unlike previous implementation). I wasn't sure of why it was implemented that way so I left it into a comment so I can come back to it if there was a specific design choice and need to implement it this way. The comment Line 104-137 was from before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Removed these comments.
client/src/utils/jobsUtil.js
Outdated
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ | |||
import { object } from 'prop-types'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can remove this unused import
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Removed this unused import
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM.
Can you please add unit tests to add coverage to the notes is hidden for parameters and file inputs? And missing tests for scenarios related to '_', and other conditional checks.
Lets try to add unit tests going forward. I'll do the same on my PRs.
Added additional test suites for this |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
…etJobDisplayInformation
Overview
The view details in Job History currently shows input parameters that have isHidden: true properties. This code fixes that issue as well as adds few more jobAttributes to the Output section.
Related
Changes
Testing
UI
Notes