Tests: allow for completely hidden options to not have docstrings #3259
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
the
waiting-on: peer-review
|
I feel like instead of allowing a missing docstring, it should still describe the option even when hidden. i.e. "Replaced by ...". |
Jarno458
approved these changes
May 3, 2024
Exempt-Medic
added
the
is: enhancement
|
Why? |
It says why in the description. Being snarky doesn't help anyone. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What is this fixing or adding?
We have hidden options now, but unit tests still assert that they have docstrings even though said strings can never be user visible in certain cases, so this allows that.
How was this tested?
Removed a docstring from one of my options and ran the test with all the different visibility flags.
If this makes graphical changes, please attach screenshots.