fix: Select input name instead of file in ParseFile

[mbfakourii]

Pull Request

• Report security issues confidentially.
• Any contribution is under this license.
• Link this pull request to an issue.

Issue

Select the file name from the input name instead of file

Closes: #1011

Approach

n/a

Tasks

• Add tests
• Add changes to documentation (guides, repository pages, code comments)

[parse-github-assistant]

I will reformat the title to use the proper commit message syntax.

[parse-github-assistant]

Thanks for opening this pull request!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 43.48%. Comparing base (c388545) to head (d78c59d).
Report is 5 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
packages/dart/lib/src/objects/parse_file.dart	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
packages/dart/lib/src/objects/parse_x_file.dart	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1012      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   43.37%   43.48%   +0.11%     
==========================================
  Files          61       61              
  Lines        3463     3463              
==========================================
+ Hits         1502     1506       +4     
+ Misses       1961     1957       -4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[mbfakourii]

@mtrezza

The two failed items are not related to the codes of this PR. I will check these two items in another PR.

[mtrezza]

Could you add a test for this?

[mbfakourii]

Could you add a test for this?

Added.

[mtrezza]

It seems that codecov still reported the new code as not covered. Is there a test case missing?

https://github.com/parse-community/Parse-SDK-Flutter/pull/1012/checks?check_run_id=31443404272

[mbfakourii]

It seems that codecov still reported the new code as not covered. Is there a test case missing?

https://github.com/parse-community/Parse-SDK-Flutter/pull/1012/checks?check_run_id=31443404272

No, there is no problem. I have written a test for exactly the same line that had problem. Codecov seems to have not detected well !

[mbfakourii]

@mtrezza

Why are the comments removed? These comments are based on the project's test writing standard

Please check these files.

https://github.com/parse-community/Parse-SDK-Flutter/tree/master/packages/dart/test/src

[mtrezza]

I don't think these comments add any value, nor are they currently consistently used, nor are they practical.

If you look at

https://github.com/parse-community/Parse-SDK-Flutter/blob/master/packages/dart/test/src/objects/parse_base_test.dart

you can see that they are all over the place, sometimes missing, sometimes they are mixed with other comments with seems confusing. It's obvious that an expect is an assertion, and there may not be a clear order as a test may have multiple stages.

I'd remove them over time and avoid them for new tests.

[mbfakourii]

It seems that codecov still reported the new code as not covered. Is there a test case missing?

https://github.com/parse-community/Parse-SDK-Flutter/pull/1012/checks?check_run_id=31443404272

No, there is no problem. I have written a test for exactly the same line that had problem. Codecov seems to have not detected well !

@mtrezza

[mtrezza]

Alright, let's disregard the coverage warning for that line.

[mtrezza]

What should we do about the failing beta in the CI? I think we've added it to keep the codebase compatible for the new release. Is it failing because of a change in this PR, or is that unrelated?

[mbfakourii]

What should we do about the failing beta in the CI? I think we've added it to keep the codebase compatible for the new release. Is it failing because of a change in this PR, or is that unrelated?

The reason ci fails is a warning linter in the beta version of Dart and Flutter and is not related to this PR.

[mtrezza]

Great, if you could add the version change then we go ahead and merge.

[mbfakourii]

Great, if you could add the version change then we go ahead and merge.

added

[mtrezza]

Looks good!