Testing CLI commands are hard because of anonymous functions about conftest HOT 3 CLOSED

Hi @Proplex. Absolutely happy to see things separated. I'd kept everything private while I got the CLI interface working. But definitely interested in better package layout and building up a public interface. @jpreese did some initial work in #30. Pinging him so as to avoid any overlap.

from conftest.

@Proplex yes, this would be the way that I would approach it.

The intent of my initial PR was just to split up the commands into their own files/packages so that we could iterate on them afterwards. Doing everything in a single PR would've made the one I had even bigger than it already was.

I would also expect the TestFunction to take in a Reader, and have the NewTestCommand() pass it in. Then for testing, we can just call TestFunction with our own reader without having to rely on the real file system.

from conftest.

@garethr to keep the backlog of issues tidy, I feel we can consider this an answered question and close.

As we introduce new features and continue to work on the project, we should strive to make the commands testable.

from conftest.