ZacharyZhang-NY
e74dafcd36
Three independently ugly bugs that all fed the same log flood:
* Electron's `WebFrameMain.send` writes every "Render frame was disposed"
to stderr via `console.error`. When the worker fans a second
agent-event past a reloading renderer, we produced thousands of
identical lines and stalled the main loop on stderr I/O. Added a
`mainFrame.detached` guard so the send is short-circuited before
Electron's own catch block fires, and installed a targeted filter in
`suppress-warnings.ts` (now actually imported from the entry point)
so the specific `console.error("Error sending from webFrameMain:"…)`
noise never reaches the terminal. Any other payload still surfaces.
* `dispatchAgentMessage` accepted the human-reader sentinel as a wake
target when an agent replied to `__board__` — `wakeAgentIfPossible`
then called `db.getAgent("__board__")`, threw, and the dispatcher
kept repeating on every send. Strip `HUMAN_SENDER_ID` at
`resolveMessageWakeTargets`, and keep a defense-in-depth guard in the
heartbeat so a stray caller (future automation fan-out) cannot
reintroduce the crash.
* Pi's skills loader rejects any SKILL.md whose frontmatter `name`
diverges from its parent directory. The four bundled `my-writing-style`
copies declared `name: writing-style-skill`, so every install emitted
a warning and dropped the skill. They also lived as orphan gitlinks
(mode 160000 without .gitmodules), and the global `*.md` gitignore
hid every other SKILL.md from version control. Fixed the frontmatter
to match the dir, converted the dangling submodules to plain trees,
and allowlisted `builtin-skills/**/*.md` so a fresh clone carries the
catalogue instead of silently losing it.
2.3 KiB
2.3 KiB
title, impact, impactDescription, tags
| title | impact | impactDescription | tags |
|---|---|---|---|
| One Concept Per Test | MEDIUM | enables precise failure diagnosis | test, assert, concept, focus |
One Concept Per Test
Each test should verify a single concept or behavior. Multiple assertions are fine when they all verify different aspects of that one concept. What you want to avoid is testing unrelated concerns in a single test.
Incorrect (multiple unrelated concepts in one test):
@Test
public void testUserRegistration() {
User user = userService.register("bob@example.com", "password123");
// Concept 1: user creation
assertNotNull(user);
assertNotNull(user.getId());
// Concept 2: email notification (unrelated to creation details)
verify(emailService).sendWelcome("bob@example.com");
// Concept 3: repository state (separate concern)
assertEquals(1, userRepository.count());
}
// If this fails, which concept is broken? Creation? Email? Persistence?
Correct (one concept per test, multiple assertions are fine):
@Test
public void registerShouldCreateActiveUserWithGeneratedId() {
User user = userService.register("bob@example.com", "password123");
assertNotNull(user.getId());
assertEquals("bob@example.com", user.getEmail());
assertTrue(user.isActive());
}
@Test
public void registerShouldSendWelcomeEmail() {
userService.register("bob@example.com", "password123");
verify(emailService).sendWelcome("bob@example.com");
}
@Test
public void registerShouldPersistUser() {
userService.register("bob@example.com", "password123");
assertEquals(1, userRepository.count());
}
The first test has three assertions — that's fine because they all verify a single concept: "the returned user object is correctly constructed." Each test can be understood from its name alone.
When NOT to split tests:
- When multiple assertions verify the same behavior from different angles (like checking all fields of a returned object), keep them together — splitting creates duplicate setup and slower test suites.
- When the operation under test has side effects (API calls, DB writes), avoid calling it multiple times just to isolate assertions.
Reference: Clean Code, Chapter 9: Unit Tests