Skip to content

Conversation

@quinarygio
Copy link
Contributor

@quinarygio quinarygio commented Nov 28, 2025

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

  • The commit message follows our guidelines
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
  • A PR or issue has been opened in all impacted repositories (if any)

Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem?

#3631

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

What is the current behavior?

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?

Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API?

  • Yes
  • No

If yes, please check if the following requirements are fulfilled

  • The Breaking Change or Deprecated label has been added
  • The migration steps are described in the following section

What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR? (migration steps)

Other information:

zamarrenolm
zamarrenolm previously approved these changes Dec 1, 2025
.setNode(2)
.add();

// Create 3 switches
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
// Create 3 switches
// Create 2 switches

Comment on lines 20 to 24
* Test to verify consistency between getSwitches(), getSwitchStream(), and
* getSwitchCount() methods
* in node-breaker topology. These methods should all exclude
* InternalConnections and only return
* real voltage level switches.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* Test to verify consistency between getSwitches(), getSwitchStream(), and
* getSwitchCount() methods
* in node-breaker topology. These methods should all exclude
* InternalConnections and only return
* real voltage level switches.
* Test to verify consistency between getSwitches(), getSwitchStream(), and
* getSwitchCount() methods in node-breaker topology. These methods should all exclude
* InternalConnections and only return real voltage level switches.

Signed-off-by: Giovanni Ferrari <[email protected]>
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Dec 1, 2025

Copy link
Member

@rolnico rolnico left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

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.

Inconsistence in NodeBreaker topology between getting switches and switches count

4 participants