Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2] iproto: add an empty body to the unprepare response

[Alexander Turenko <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 08:41:35AM +0000, Nikita Pettik wrote:
> On 05 Mar 08:41, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On 03 мар 19:16, Chris Sosnin wrote:
> > > Absence of the body in the unprepare response forces users to perform
> > > additional checks to avoid errors. Adding an empty body fixes this problem.
> > > 
> > > Closes #4769
> > > ---
> > > branch: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/tree/ksosnin/gh-4769-unprepare-response-body
> > > issue: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/4769
> > > 
> > > As Nikita suggested, I created box/iproto.test.lua, and basically
> > > inserted wrappers for requests testing from box-py for future usage.
> > 
> > Could you please rename the test to be not so generic?
> > Like box/gh-4769-iproto-unprep-body or whatever.
> 
> Kirill, this test is going to assemble all iproto-related tests
> which don't rely on net.box module. Setting up all preparations
> required for raw iproto communication results in duplicating ~30-40
> lines of code in each test file.

Technically there are two ways to extract helpers from a 'core =
tarantool' test:

* Add it to, say, test/box/box.lua and to _G.protected_globals.
* Add it to a separate Lua file in test/box/lua and to 'lua_libs' field
  in test/box/suite.ini. After this you can use `require` for this
  module in a test.

So technically you're not blocked here. Both ways are available and
don't lead to much code duplication, but the process (SOP) requires to
add a test for a bug to a separate file. (Personally I still don't sure
it is good, but anyway.)

NB: 'receive', not 'recieve'. Very often typo.

WBR, Alexander Turenko.