e.g. @domain="[]" would be seen as non-empty by the search view, and
if multiple domains the search view would generate a nonliteral
``['|', '[]', '[]]`` which would just yield ``['|']`` after evaluation
and concatenation, which is an invalid domain and would blow up the
server.
Specifically filter out the values ``[]`` and ``{}`` from filters
bzr revid: xmo@openerp.com-20121129112413-yrgncnesqs093jwf
when creating the instance, set instance.session.uid to 42 so the evaluator has something to chew on when it tries to create the evaluation context
bzr revid: xmo@openerp.com-20121120101733-b0ire11bbuywfi8u
* mock(:) callback receives a pair (args, kwargs) not raw params
* list buttons test triggers domain evaluation, which depends on form (why???)
bzr revid: xmo@openerp.com-20121116115544-cdowx66w3m8inqon
simplify code and make setup & teardown processes more reliable
add testing.Stack tools which stacks promise-returning functions
around the actual promise-returning function to execute (the test case
itself).
testing.Stack returns an object with 3 methods, ``push([setup][,
teardown])``, ``unshift([setup][, teardown])`` and ``execute(fn,
*args)``. ``push`` and ``unshift`` create a new stack with the
provided setup and teardown added respectively at the top and bottom
of the stack.
``execute`` will walk the stack from bottom to top executing ``setup``
handlers (and waiting on their result), if all setup handlers execute
without failure the ``fn`` callback gets executed (and waited on) then
*all* ``teardown`` handlers are executed from top to bottom:
| setup
| setup
| setup
| setup
| fn
| teardown
| teardown
| teardown
V teardown
If a ``setup`` handler fails (the promise is rejected), teardowns will
start executing *from the previous level* (so the ``teardown``
matching the failed ``setup`` will *not* be run), but all
``teardowns`` below that will be run regardless, even if one fails the
next one will still be executed.
The stack will either ultimately return a promise rejection using the
*first* rejection it got (a rejection may be cascading, so the
rejection of a setup may also lead to or be linked to a teardown being
rejected later), or will return the resolution from ``fn``.
If ``execute`` is passed further arguments, those arguments will in
turn be forwarded to ``fn`` as well as all ``setup`` and ``teardown``
handlers.
bzr revid: xmo@openerp.com-20121116071712-zuld957icellezum
the onwrite handler created an "empty" record with no field value
whatsoever, which'd blow up in the py evaluator. As during creation
(edition of a record where all fields are empty) create a record where
all fields are set to ``false`` so rendering works correctly, and wait
for content refresh to get correct data.
Also added a test for @on_write
bzr revid: xmo@openerp.com-20121112150526-vrr66ms95qbuoped
The facet removal from its last value being removed
(`this.remove(facet)` in the 'change' handler of the SearchQuery)
broadcasted its `remove` event, triggering the `do_search` (and
repaint) hook of the SearchView a second time right after the
`change`-triggered search.
Not only is this unnecessary and duplicated work (the `remove` is a
sync operation, so searchview-attached events haven't yet executed by
the time `remove` is called), the listview really doesn't like getting
a ``search`` signal while it's already executing a search.
So fix that.
bzr revid: xmo@openerp.com-20121018124005-6vfi7tqasz32ai8v
Raphael Collet
Fabien Meghazi
niv-openerp
Xavier Morel
vta vta@openerp.com
ggh-openerp
Vidhin Mehta (OpenERP)