🧪 Add unit test for PDF module registration - #90
Conversation
Added a test case for `register_pdf` in `stdlib/src/pdf.rs` to ensure the module is registered properly with the expected metadata (name, version, empty capabilities and exports). Co-authored-by: Tcode-Motion <188012755+Tcode-Motion@users.noreply.github.com>
|
👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
🎯 What: The testing gap addressed
Added a missing unit test for the
register_pdfstandard library module registration function withinstdlib/src/pdf.rs.📊 Coverage: What scenarios are now tested
The unit test validates the happy path of module registration. It verifies that invoking
register_pdfon a newStdlibRegistrycorrectly provisions the module with the expected name ("std.pdf"), version ("1.0.0"), and empty sets for both exports and required capabilities.✨ Result: The improvement in test coverage
Ensures that future modifications to the PDF module registration or underlying registry mechanism will not silently drop or misconfigure the
std.pdfmodule.PR created automatically by Jules for task 15255348215550307609 started by @Tcode-Motion