Skip to content

test(jwk): cover Jwks::to_value, builder default, and negative variant matrix#701

Closed
EffortlessSteven wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/coverage-jwk-S3CNe
Closed

test(jwk): cover Jwks::to_value, builder default, and negative variant matrix#701
EffortlessSteven wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/coverage-jwk-S3CNe

Conversation

@EffortlessSteven

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

Closes coverage gaps in uselesskey-jwk:

  • Jwks::to_value() was only exercised through Display; add a direct test plus a parity test against the Display route.
  • JwksBuilder::default() was only used implicitly through new(); assert the equivalence and the empty-state invariant.
  • KidSorted::new() / default() empty-state invariants; preserve insertion order across 10 equal-kid pushes.
  • PublicJwk::negative_value / PrivateJwk::negative_value across every concrete enum arm (RSA / EC / OKP / Oct) × every NegativeJwk variant. This pins the WrongKty else-branch for non-RSA inputs (OKP, Oct, EC) and the per-shape field-lookup order for MalformedField and MismatchedParameters.
  • NegativeJwks::DuplicateKey on a populated set — the existing tests only covered the empty-set scanner-safe fallback path.

13 new tests in crates/uselesskey-jwk/tests/jwk_extra_coverage.rs; no production code changes.

Test plan

  • cargo test -p uselesskey-jwk --all-features
  • cargo fmt -p uselesskey-jwk --check
  • cargo clippy -p uselesskey-jwk --all-features --all-targets -- -D warnings

Generated by Claude Code

…trix

Adds direct unit tests for:

- `Jwks::to_value()` (was only exercised via `Display`).
- `JwksBuilder::default()` equivalence to `new()` and `KidSorted::new`/
  `default` empty-state invariants, plus stability of 10 equal-kid pushes.
- `PublicJwk::negative_value` / `PrivateJwk::negative_value` across every
  concrete enum arm (RSA / EC / OKP / Oct) × every `NegativeJwk` variant.
  This nails the `WrongKty` else-branch for non-RSA inputs (OKP, Oct, EC)
  and the per-shape field-lookup order for `MalformedField` and
  `MismatchedParameters`.
- `NegativeJwks::DuplicateKey` on a populated set — the existing tests
  only covered the empty-set scanner-safe fallback.
@gemini-code-assist

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

You have reached your daily quota limit. Please wait up to 24 hours and I will start processing your requests again!

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented May 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@EffortlessSteven has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 42 minutes and 42 seconds before requesting another review.

You’ve run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 81298666-bf2a-4020-b163-961170a67183

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fad488d and e9a1a44.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • crates/uselesskey-jwk/tests/jwk_extra_coverage.rs
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch claude/coverage-jwk-S3CNe

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@EffortlessSteven

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Closing as superseded by #714. The useful JWK coverage was ported onto current main in a clean branch; this older draft branch is stale and would remove newer landed work if merged.

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.

2 participants