Skip to content

BCDA-9781: multiple query/sub-query unit tests#1309

Merged
bhagatparwinder merged 4 commits intomainfrom
parwinder/BCDA-9781-multiple-params-in-typefilter
Feb 12, 2026
Merged

BCDA-9781: multiple query/sub-query unit tests#1309
bhagatparwinder merged 4 commits intomainfrom
parwinder/BCDA-9781-multiple-params-in-typefilter

Conversation

@bhagatparwinder
Copy link
Contributor

🎫 Ticket

https://jira.cms.gov/browse/BCDA-9781

🛠 Changes

Added 3 unit tests for V3 testing multiple query and sub-query parameters

🧪 Validation

Local test suite run passed ✅

@bhagatparwinder bhagatparwinder requested a review from a team as a code owner February 10, 2026 23:20
@bhagatparwinder bhagatparwinder changed the title multiple _typeFilter subqueries BCDA-9781: multiple query/sub-query unit tests Feb 10, 2026
Copy link
Collaborator

@carlpartridge carlpartridge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think @colby-seyferth-nava might be the best approver here?

carlpartridge
carlpartridge previously approved these changes Feb 11, 2026
Copy link
Collaborator

@carlpartridge carlpartridge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If Im reading the tests right all we check is that the validation passes by checking the response code: assert.Equal(t, http.StatusOK, rr.Code, tt.description). Do we need to be checking each typeFilter param we passed in was successfully pulled/read/stored? Im worried that the validation process might just drop excess typeFilters but still pass.

@carlpartridge carlpartridge self-requested a review February 11, 2026 14:14
@bhagatparwinder
Copy link
Contributor Author

If Im reading the tests right all we check is that the validation passes by checking the response code: assert.Equal(t, http.StatusOK, rr.Code, tt.description). Do we need to be checking each typeFilter param we passed in was successfully pulled/read/stored? Im worried that the validation process might just drop excess typeFilters but still pass.

Thanks, Carl. Took the suggestion and added expectedTypeFilter to validate against passed filters.

@bhagatparwinder bhagatparwinder merged commit 6ae7f61 into main Feb 12, 2026
6 checks passed
@bhagatparwinder bhagatparwinder deleted the parwinder/BCDA-9781-multiple-params-in-typefilter branch February 12, 2026 00:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants