test: tolerate condition column in ArchiveAsync as.data.table test#349
Merged
Conversation
A failed task adds a "condition" column to the archive data, so the column-name check must ignore it to avoid spurious failures. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When a task fails, rush adds a
conditioncolumn to the archive data returned byas.data.table(ArchiveAsync)(viadata_with_state(), whose fields include"condition"). The column-name check intest_ArchiveAsync.Rusedidentical.to, which fails whenever a task happens to fail and the extra column appears.This relaxes the check to ignore the optional
conditioncolumn while still verifying the exact set and order of the remaining columns.Same class of flakiness fixed in mlr3tuning. Checked mlr3mbo and mlr3hyperband too: their async archive tests already use tolerant
must.includechecks (or access individual columns), so no changes are needed there.🤖 Generated with Claude Code