Same arguments as in Iafa2412. The one reason to use more detailled
per-method @covers annotations is to avoid "accidental coverage"
where code is marked as being covered by tests that don't assert
anything that would be meaningful for this code. This is especially a
problem with older, bigger classes with lots of side effects.
But all the new classes we introduced over the years are small, with
predictable, local effects.
That's also why we keep the more detailled @covers annotations for
the original Cite class.
Bug: T353227
Bug: T353269
Change-Id: I69850f4d740d8ad5a7c2368b9068dc91e47cc797
This parser test is a bit obscure, in my opinion. We added it in
I8c4de96 to make sure we don't get thousand separators in most
places.
We continued reworking the code since then. By now it's effectively
impossible to "accidentally" get thousand separators. The
problematic methods from the Language class are not even accessible
any more from this code.
To make the tests more robust we now use createNoOpMock (done via
the previous patch) where it matters, specifically for all Language
and Parser mocks. This proves the problematic Language methods are
never called.
Bug: T253743
Bug: T238187
Change-Id: I9bfe1f4decfaf699996da63e19473c2c0d581d9d
Both Language and Parser are extremely complex classes with hundreds
of public methods. We really want to make sure we are not depending
on anything unexpected from these classes. If calls are made into
these classes we want to know exactly what is called.
Doing this also showed that some mocked methods are not even needed.
Change-Id: Icdfff6c07be78a47bf7cadb1813a72581a51272a
This is mostly because recent IDEs can understand createMock() quite
good. We usually don't add such hints every time we use createMock().
We would have a million of them. ;-)
Change-Id: If9e37807a6945c4408d374fc97664cd636020ffd
This is done to make the discussion in If3dcfd7 easier.
When we introduced this code we actually used it to format
entire numbers. We had to change this later to *not* localize
digits, but only separators. Language::formatNum is and always
was able to do this, so we just continued to use it.
This is discussed now.
It turns out there is only a single place left where we use
formatNum, and it does nothing but localizing the decimal
point. There is another way to do the same.
Bug: T237467
Change-Id: I89b17a9e11b3afc6c653ba7ccc6ff84c37863b66
The name of the base class in tests is guaranteed to only occur a
single time in a file. There is not much value in making it relative,
and requiring it to appear in the use section. Especially because it
is in the root namespace.
This reflects what I once encoded in the sniff
https://github.com/wmde/WikibaseCodeSniffer/blob/master/Wikibase/Sniffs/Namespaces/FullQualifiedClassNameSniff.php
I wish we could pick this rule and use it in our codebases. But it
seems it is to specific and can't be applied on all codebases, hence
it can't become part of the upstream MediaWiki rule set. At least not
at the moment.
Change-Id: I77c2490c565b7a468c5c944301fc684d20206ec4
Because that is what it does. Note our method is different from the one
in the Language class. We only accept strings.
Change-Id: I39107e837cc29f2d7c8867c1e602aa643f9e1a57
We never access Language directly, so proxy its method instead of
returning the full object.
I believe I've found a bug, but not fixing here: the footnote body
numeric backlinks like "2.1" behave as if they were decimals rather
than two numbers stuck together with a dot. So they are localized
to "2,1".
Bug: T239725
Change-Id: If386bf96d48cb95c0a287a02bedfe984941efe30
