We have several areas of code that coverage.py does not believe are being tested. Those lines of code are:

• 2968
• 2985-2987
• 3019

For line 2968, it does not appear that we have a test that specifically exercises theraise statement by trying to compare an input value that is not a PrimaryKey.

Yep, I missed the coverage part 😅 Thank you for pointing that out. I've added missing coverage in commit29d1238

My understanding from the Python documentation is that:

TypeError: Is raised when an operation or function is applied to an object of inappropriate type. The associated value is a string giving details about the type mismatch.

This exception may be raised by user code to indicate that an attempted operation on an object is not supported, and is not meant to be. If an object is meant to support a given operation but has not yet provided an implementation,NotImplementedError is the proper exception to raise.

Passing arguments of the wrong type (e.g. passing a list when an int is expected) should result in aTypeError, but passing arguments with the wrong value (e.g. a number outside expected boundaries) should result in aValueError.

@chalmerlowe oh, right. Thank you. I missed that. It should bereturn but notraise.
I think we should notraise anything here to not cause errors and to be consistent with the existing code.

For this portion of the mod (2985-2987), coverage.py indicates that we are not exercising this code fully.

We do have tests that reference ColumnReferences, but not necessarily in a way that fully exercises each line of this code.

Thanks. I've addedcolumn_references to the__eq__ in commitda663b2

This (3019) is also identified by coverage.py as being untested

Change allNotImplementedErrors as noted in the previous comment to look similar to this:

TypeError("<add a suitable message for the user to figure out the problem.")