Synchronizing shared expression tests with frontend

[olemartinorg]

Description

I compared the folders with those in app-frontend-react, and updating tests to match.

A few notes:

• I've added shared tests for argv. Positional arguments didn't seem to support null, so I changed the signatures to do that.
• Most of the changes to tests were caused by me adding altinnRowId to rows (back when that was implemented - frontend has no functionality to automatically add them)
• Frontend can no longer gracefully handle duplicate component IDs, so I removed a few of those tests. I'm still keeping the ones in invalid, but those have been removed in frontend as well (it's just very cumbersome to test that there, because it happens long before the expression engine is even ready).

Related Issue(s)

• Synchronizing shared expression tests with backend app-frontend-react#2917

Verification

• Your code builds clean without any errors or warnings
• Manual testing done (required)
• Relevant automated test added (if you find this hard, leave it and we'll help out)
• All tests run green (not on my machine, but we'll see what github says!)

Documentation

• User documentation is updated with a separate linked PR in altinn-studio-docs. (if applicable)

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[ivarne]

Good!

[ivarne]

We have a folder named test/Altinn.App.Core.Tests/LayoutExpressions/CommonTests/up-for-evaluation where you can put shared tests that don't (yet) work in backend

[olemartinorg]

We have a folder named test/Altinn.App.Core.Tests/LayoutExpressions/CommonTests/up-for-evaluation where you can put shared tests that don't (yet) work in backend

Yes, I saw that. Was about to copy those folder over there when you wrote this comment, but after thinking more about it I came to the conclusion that I don't really like that pattern:

1. When comparing folders (I use Meld for that), these all appear as different. There's no good way to tell such a tool that 'these folders are actually the same as these other folders you see over there', so it just adds to the list of things I ingore when diffing.
2. They're never really used in the backend tests anyway, so I guess they're just there to remind developers passing by that there are some functions that still need to be implemented. I think the docs page should be the place for that, or issues on github of course.
3. Since the diffing marks these tests as entirely different anyway, I never really looked at those tests in up-for-evaluation when syncing this time. I think that can be misleading, because if someone picks up one of those folder, decides to implement that function and use the shared tests to validate - they may already be outdated and cause you to implement the wrong thing.

So, is there a good way to include them along with all the other test files, but ignore them in the tests instead? That way the diff between frontend and backend gets to be very clean, and you get updated tests whenever we sync across repos (and in the future if we convert to a monorepo, these tests will be ready for that as well).

[ivarne]

So, is there a good way to include them along with all the other test files, but ignore them in the tests instead? That way the diff between frontend and backend gets to be very clean, and you get updated tests whenever we sync across repos (and in the future if we convert to a monorepo, these tests will be ready for that as well).

Yes, there is [Theory(Skip = "Not implemented yet")]. They will show up in Skipped tests statistics, but that is probably what we want. I totally see your arguments against the up-for-evaluation folder, but in that case we should delete it instead of having it outdated.