fn: generalize type of t in UnwrapOrFail

[starius]

Change Description

It is needed to pass other types satisfying needed interfaces to methods Option.UnwrapOrFail and Result.UnwrapOrFail.

An example of such a type is *lntest.HarnessTest. It embeds *testing.T and has all the methods but can't be passed directly as *testing.T, but can be passed now as an instance of Testing interface. Also *testing.B and assert.CollectT (from "require" package).

Methods Helper() and FailNow() are optional and they are called if exist.

Also added the test for UnwrapOrFail methods of Option and Result.

---

Also fixed a bug in Result.UnwrapOrFail. It used to return zero value in case of success. It should return the value stored.

Steps to Test

This is an internal change needed to simplify development.

Pull Request Checklist

Testing

• Your PR passes all CI checks.
• Tests covering the positive and negative (error paths) are included.
• Bug fixes contain tests triggering the bug to prevent regressions.

Code Style and Documentation

• The change obeys the Code Documentation and Commenting guidelines, and lines wrap at 80.
• Commits follow the Ideal Git Commit Structure.
• Any new logging statements use an appropriate subsystem and logging level.
• Any new lncli commands have appropriate tags in the comments for the rpc in the proto file.
• There is a change description in the release notes, or [skip ci] in the commit message for small changes.

📝 Please see our Contribution Guidelines for further guidance.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

🏷️ Labels to auto review (1)

• llm-review

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[ProofOfKeags]

As stated in #9141 review, this is a NACK from me. If we do this we should tightly define the testing interface we want to conform to and then add a separate file that defines it and its expected properties, rather than putting it in option.go or other specific type files.

[starius]

As stated in #9141 review, this is a NACK from me. If we do this we should tightly define the testing interface we want to conform to and then add a separate file that defines it and its expected properties, rather than putting it in option.go or other specific type files.

I moved the interface to a separate file (testing.go) and separated it to multiple parts. The base interface (TestingT) has only method Errorf. This is needed to support assert.CollectT as well, which can appear in require.EventuallyWithT callback. "require" package itself defines assert.TestingT which has only one method: Errorf.

I added a test for the method testing it with real t and with a mock to make sure Helper() and FailNow() are called.

[starius]

I found a bug in Result.UnwrapOrFail implementation. It used to return zero value in case of success. It should return the value stored. I put it into a separate commit "fn: fix UnwrapOrFail success case",

[ProofOfKeags]

I found a bug in Result.UnwrapOrFail implementation. It used to return zero value in case of success. It should return the value stored. I put it into a separate commit "fn: fix UnwrapOrFail success case",

Is this still true, I remember finding the same bug and fixed it, I thought.

EDIT: Yeah I fixed this here