Skip to content

docs: Clarify why progressive test allows verification failures #48

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.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
max-sixty wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

docs: Clarify why progressive test allows verification failures #48

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions tests/integration_tests/list_progressive.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -86,11 +86,11 @@ fn test_list_progressive_rendering_stages() {
let samples = output.samples(3);
assert!(!samples.is_empty(), "Should get at least one sample stage");

// If we have enough stages, use canonical verification
// (handles edge cases like fast completion gracefully)
// Best-effort verification: progressive rendering may complete too quickly to observe on
// fast CI machines. Other tests (test_list_progressive_rendering_basic,
// test_list_progressive_dots_decrease) provide strict verification with .unwrap();
// this test focuses on final output correctness.
if output.stages.len() >= 2 {
// verify_progressive_filling() returns Err if progressive rendering wasn't observable,
// which is acceptable on fast CI machines - just skip the assertion in that case
let _ = output.verify_progressive_filling();
}

Expand Down