Worker Protocol:
Note that the worker protocol already had a serialization for
`BuildResult`; this was added in
a4604f1928. It didn't have any versioning
support because at that time reusable seralizers were not away for the protocol
version. It could thus only be used for new messages also introduced in
that commit.
Now that we do support versioning in reusable serializers, we can expand
it to support all known versions and use it in many more places.
The exist test data becomes the version 1.29 tests: note that those
files' contents are unchanged. 1.28 and 1.27 tests are added to cover
the older code-paths.
The keyered build result test only has 1.29 because the keying was also
added in a4604f19284254ac98f19a13ff7c2216de7fe176; the older
serializations are always used unkeyed.
Serve Protocol:
Conversely, no attempt was made to factor out such a serializer for the
serve protocol, so our work there in this commit for that protocol
proceeds from scratch.
It was some ad-hoc functions to account for versions, while the already
factored-out serializer just supported the latest version.
Now, we can fold that version-specific logic into the factored out one,
and so we do.
This will allow us to factor out logic, which is currently scattered
inline, into several reusable instances
The tests are also updated to support versioning. Currently all Worker
and Serve protocol tests are using the minimum version, since no
version-specific serialisers have been created yet. But in subsequent
commits when that changes, we will test individual versions to ensure
complete coverage.
Copy the relevant tests to ensure the new interfaces added in the last
commit are tested.
Perhaps I should try to deduplicat these tests some more. However its
not clear how to do that outside of a big ugly C++ macro.
https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/main/docs/advanced.md has some
stuff but it is cumbersome and I didn't figure it out yet.
This is done in a separate commit in order to be sure that the first
commit really didn't change any behavior; if we changed the
implementation and the tests at once, it would be harder to tell whether
or not some behavioral changes slipped in what is supposed to be a "pure
refactor".
Co-Authored-By: Valentin Gagarin <valentin.gagarin@tweag.io>
This was somewhat of a false alarm. The problem was not that the
protocol implementation actually failed to round trip, but that two of
the fields were ignored entirely --- not serialized and deserialized at
all.
For reference, those fields were added in
fa68eb367e.
Continue with the characterization testing idioms begun in
c70484454f, but this time for unit tests.
Co-authored-by: Andreas Rammhold <andreas@rammhold.de>
