feat(s5): domain model unit tests — 149 tests for PayoutOrder SM, VOs, entities (STA-148)#153
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…, entities (STA-148) Test coverage for all S5 domain model components: - PayoutOrder: 12 state machine transitions (happy path, hold path, failure paths), fiat amount tolerance invariant (±0.01), terminal state guards, canApply() queries, immutability, factory validation (20 fields) - StablecoinRedemption: creation + 10 validation cases - OffRampTransaction: creation + default rawResponse + 6 validation cases - Value objects: BankAccount (8), MobileMoneyAccount (6), Money (6), StablecoinTicker (12 — all 5 supported tickers, unsupported, auto-fill), PartnerIdentifier (5) - PayoutOrderFixtures in testFixtures with state factories for all 10 states 157 total tests (149 new + 8 ArchUnit). All green. Closes STA-148 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Puneethkumarck
added
phase-3
WalkthroughComprehensive unit test suite added for fiat off-ramp domain models, covering validation, state transitions, and immutability. Includes tests for value objects (BankAccount, Money, StablecoinTicker), transaction entities, and a state machine (PayoutOrder). Fixture utility provided for test data construction. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/OffRampTransactionTest.java`:
- Around line 53-71: The tests for OffRampTransaction should be made
deterministic: when calling OffRampTransaction.create(...) assert that
offRampTxnId() is not only non-null but different between two separately created
instances (create two txns and assert txn1.offRampTxnId() !=
txn2.offRampTxnId()), and tighten the receivedAt() check by capturing two
timestamps (Instant before = Instant.now(); create txn; Instant after =
Instant.now()) and assert txn.receivedAt() isBetween(before, after) (or assert
receivedAt() isAfterOrEqualTo(before) and isBeforeOrEqualTo(after)) to ensure
timestamps are bounded; update the test methods that call
OffRampTransaction.create, offRampTxnId(), and receivedAt() accordingly.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/PayoutOrderTest.java`:
- Around line 657-662: Update the test manualReviewRejectsEscalate in
PayoutOrderTest to also assert the exception message contains the expected
terminal text: when calling aManualReviewOrder().escalateToManualReview()
capture the StateMachineException and add hasMessageContaining("terminal") (or
the same message used by other terminal-state tests) so the test verifies both
exception type and consistent message contract for terminal-state guards.
- Around line 268-281: Add a new unit test in PayoutOrderTest that mirrors
throwsWhenAppliedFxRateZero but passes a negative BigDecimal for appliedFxRate
to PayoutOrder.create; assert it throws IllegalArgumentException and
hasMessageContaining("appliedFxRate"). Locate the test class PayoutOrderTest and
add a test method (e.g., throwsWhenAppliedFxRateNegative) calling
PayoutOrder.create with BigDecimal.valueOf(-1) (or an equivalent negative value)
for appliedFxRate to cover the <= 0 validation in PayoutOrder.create.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/StablecoinRedemptionTest.java`:
- Around line 73-82: The test populatesStablecoinTicker currently claims to
verify issuer and decimals but only asserts ticker and issuer; either add an
assertion for the decimals (e.g.,
assertThat(redemption.stablecoin().decimals()).isEqualTo(expectedDecimals))
after creating the StablecoinRedemption via
StablecoinRedemption.create(PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), ...) or change the
`@DisplayName` to remove "and decimals" so it reflects only ticker and issuer;
update the test method populatesStablecoinTicker accordingly and use the
stablecoin() accessor (ticker(), issuer(), decimals()) to make the chosen
change.
- Around line 52-71: The tests use weak assertions: improve the factory
assertions in StablecoinRedemptionTest by creating two independent instances via
StablecoinRedemption.create and assert their redemptionId() values are non-null
and not equal to each other (to rule out a constant), and for redeemedAt()
capture an Instant before and after creation and assert redeemedAt() is >=
before and <= after to prevent future timestamps; update the tests referencing
StablecoinRedemption.create, redemptionId(), and redeemedAt() accordingly.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/testFixtures/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/fixtures/PayoutOrderFixtures.java`:
- Around line 115-117: The aCompletedOrder() fixture is non-deterministic due to
Instant.now(); change it to use a fixed Instant constant (e.g., COMPLETED_AT) or
make the method accept an Instant parameter with a default constant to ensure
deterministic returns. Update aCompletedOrder() to call
aPayoutProcessingOrder().completePayout(PARTNER_REFERENCE, COMPLETED_AT) (or
delegate to a new overloaded aCompletedOrder(Instant completedAt)) and add the
COMPLETED_AT constant in the fixture class so tests get stable, comparable
objects.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 49569095-9491-4b15-ae93-3f23e54d7bfd
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/BankAccountTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/MobileMoneyAccountTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/MoneyTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/OffRampTransactionTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/PartnerIdentifierTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/PayoutOrderTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/StablecoinRedemptionTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/StablecoinTickerTest.javafiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/testFixtures/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/fixtures/PayoutOrderFixtures.java
Comment on lines
+53
to
+71
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("generates a random offRampTxnId") | ||
| void generatesRandomTxnId() { | ||
| var txn = OffRampTransaction.create( | ||
| PAYOUT_ID, PARTNER_NAME, EVENT_TYPE, | ||
| AMOUNT, CURRENCY, STATUS, RAW_RESPONSE); | ||
|
|
||
| assertThat(txn.offRampTxnId()).isNotNull(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("sets receivedAt timestamp") | ||
| void setsReceivedAt() { | ||
| var before = Instant.now(); | ||
| var txn = OffRampTransaction.create( | ||
| PAYOUT_ID, PARTNER_NAME, EVENT_TYPE, | ||
| AMOUNT, CURRENCY, STATUS, RAW_RESPONSE); | ||
|
|
||
| assertThat(txn.receivedAt()).isAfterOrEqualTo(before); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Make the generated ID and timestamp checks deterministic enough to catch regressions.
Right now these tests only prove “non-null” and “not before before”. A fixed offRampTxnId or a future receivedAt would still pass. Compare two creations for different IDs and bound receivedAt with an after timestamp.
Suggested test hardening
`@Test`
`@DisplayName`("generates a random offRampTxnId")
void generatesRandomTxnId() {
- var txn = OffRampTransaction.create(
+ var first = OffRampTransaction.create(
PAYOUT_ID, PARTNER_NAME, EVENT_TYPE,
AMOUNT, CURRENCY, STATUS, RAW_RESPONSE);
+ var second = OffRampTransaction.create(
+ PAYOUT_ID, PARTNER_NAME, EVENT_TYPE,
+ AMOUNT, CURRENCY, STATUS, RAW_RESPONSE);
- assertThat(txn.offRampTxnId()).isNotNull();
+ assertThat(first.offRampTxnId()).isNotNull();
+ assertThat(first.offRampTxnId()).isNotEqualTo(second.offRampTxnId());
}
`@Test`
`@DisplayName`("sets receivedAt timestamp")
void setsReceivedAt() {
var before = Instant.now();
var txn = OffRampTransaction.create(
PAYOUT_ID, PARTNER_NAME, EVENT_TYPE,
AMOUNT, CURRENCY, STATUS, RAW_RESPONSE);
+ var after = Instant.now();
- assertThat(txn.receivedAt()).isAfterOrEqualTo(before);
+ assertThat(txn.receivedAt())
+ .isAfterOrEqualTo(before)
+ .isBeforeOrEqualTo(after);
}As per coding guidelines, "Assert on meaningful values — avoid assertTrue(result != null)".
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/OffRampTransactionTest.java`
around lines 53 - 71, The tests for OffRampTransaction should be made
deterministic: when calling OffRampTransaction.create(...) assert that
offRampTxnId() is not only non-null but different between two separately created
instances (create two txns and assert txn1.offRampTxnId() !=
txn2.offRampTxnId()), and tighten the receivedAt() check by capturing two
timestamps (Instant before = Instant.now(); create txn; Instant after =
Instant.now()) and assert txn.receivedAt() isBetween(before, after) (or assert
receivedAt() isAfterOrEqualTo(before) and isBeforeOrEqualTo(after)) to ensure
timestamps are bounded; update the test methods that call
OffRampTransaction.create, offRampTxnId(), and receivedAt() accordingly.
Comment on lines
+268
to
+281
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("throws when appliedFxRate is zero") | ||
| void throwsWhenAppliedFxRateZero() { | ||
| assertThatThrownBy(() -> PayoutOrder.create( | ||
| PAYMENT_ID, CORRELATION_ID, TRANSFER_ID, | ||
| PayoutType.FIAT, aStablecoinTicker(), | ||
| REDEEMED_AMOUNT, TARGET_CURRENCY, | ||
| BigDecimal.ZERO, RECIPIENT_ID, | ||
| RECIPIENT_ACCOUNT_HASH, | ||
| aBankAccount(), null, | ||
| PaymentRail.SEPA, aPartnerIdentifier())) | ||
| .isInstanceOf(IllegalArgumentException.class) | ||
| .hasMessageContaining("appliedFxRate"); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick | 🔵 Trivial
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if PayoutOrder.create() validates negative appliedFxRate
ast-grep --pattern $'if ($_ <= 0) {
$$$
}'
# Also search for appliedFxRate validation logic
rg -n "appliedFxRate" --type java -A3 -B1 | head -60Repository: Puneethkumarck/stablebridge-platform
Length of output: 21971
Add test case for negative appliedFxRate.
The domain validates that appliedFxRate must be positive (line 135 of PayoutOrder.java rejects <= 0). Tests exist for null and zero cases, but a negative-value test is missing for complete coverage.
Suggested test case
+ `@Test`
+ `@DisplayName`("throws when appliedFxRate is negative")
+ void throwsWhenAppliedFxRateNegative() {
+ assertThatThrownBy(() -> PayoutOrder.create(
+ PAYMENT_ID, CORRELATION_ID, TRANSFER_ID,
+ PayoutType.FIAT, aStablecoinTicker(),
+ REDEEMED_AMOUNT, TARGET_CURRENCY,
+ new BigDecimal("-0.92"), RECIPIENT_ID,
+ RECIPIENT_ACCOUNT_HASH,
+ aBankAccount(), null,
+ PaymentRail.SEPA, aPartnerIdentifier()))
+ .isInstanceOf(IllegalArgumentException.class)
+ .hasMessageContaining("appliedFxRate");
+ }📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
Suggested change
| @Test | |
| @DisplayName("throws when appliedFxRate is zero") | |
| void throwsWhenAppliedFxRateZero() { | |
| assertThatThrownBy(() -> PayoutOrder.create( | |
| PAYMENT_ID, CORRELATION_ID, TRANSFER_ID, | |
| PayoutType.FIAT, aStablecoinTicker(), | |
| REDEEMED_AMOUNT, TARGET_CURRENCY, | |
| BigDecimal.ZERO, RECIPIENT_ID, | |
| RECIPIENT_ACCOUNT_HASH, | |
| aBankAccount(), null, | |
| PaymentRail.SEPA, aPartnerIdentifier())) | |
| .isInstanceOf(IllegalArgumentException.class) | |
| .hasMessageContaining("appliedFxRate"); | |
| } | |
| `@Test` | |
| `@DisplayName`("throws when appliedFxRate is zero") | |
| void throwsWhenAppliedFxRateZero() { | |
| assertThatThrownBy(() -> PayoutOrder.create( | |
| PAYMENT_ID, CORRELATION_ID, TRANSFER_ID, | |
| PayoutType.FIAT, aStablecoinTicker(), | |
| REDEEMED_AMOUNT, TARGET_CURRENCY, | |
| BigDecimal.ZERO, RECIPIENT_ID, | |
| RECIPIENT_ACCOUNT_HASH, | |
| aBankAccount(), null, | |
| PaymentRail.SEPA, aPartnerIdentifier())) | |
| .isInstanceOf(IllegalArgumentException.class) | |
| .hasMessageContaining("appliedFxRate"); | |
| } | |
| `@Test` | |
| `@DisplayName`("throws when appliedFxRate is negative") | |
| void throwsWhenAppliedFxRateNegative() { | |
| assertThatThrownBy(() -> PayoutOrder.create( | |
| PAYMENT_ID, CORRELATION_ID, TRANSFER_ID, | |
| PayoutType.FIAT, aStablecoinTicker(), | |
| REDEEMED_AMOUNT, TARGET_CURRENCY, | |
| new BigDecimal("-0.92"), RECIPIENT_ID, | |
| RECIPIENT_ACCOUNT_HASH, | |
| aBankAccount(), null, | |
| PaymentRail.SEPA, aPartnerIdentifier())) | |
| .isInstanceOf(IllegalArgumentException.class) | |
| .hasMessageContaining("appliedFxRate"); | |
| } |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/PayoutOrderTest.java`
around lines 268 - 281, Add a new unit test in PayoutOrderTest that mirrors
throwsWhenAppliedFxRateZero but passes a negative BigDecimal for appliedFxRate
to PayoutOrder.create; assert it throws IllegalArgumentException and
hasMessageContaining("appliedFxRate"). Locate the test class PayoutOrderTest and
add a test method (e.g., throwsWhenAppliedFxRateNegative) calling
PayoutOrder.create with BigDecimal.valueOf(-1) (or an equivalent negative value)
for appliedFxRate to cover the <= 0 validation in PayoutOrder.create.
Comment on lines
+657
to
+662
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("MANUAL_REVIEW order rejects escalateToManualReview") | ||
| void manualReviewRejectsEscalate() { | ||
| assertThatThrownBy(() -> aManualReviewOrder().escalateToManualReview()) | ||
| .isInstanceOf(StateMachineException.class); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick | 🔵 Trivial
Consider asserting on exception message for consistency.
Other terminal state guard tests assert hasMessageContaining("terminal"), but this test only checks exception type. If escalateToManualReview on MANUAL_REVIEW throws StateMachineException (rather than IllegalStateException), it suggests different validation logic—valid, but documenting the expected message would strengthen the contract test.
💡 Optional consistency improvement
`@Test`
`@DisplayName`("MANUAL_REVIEW order rejects escalateToManualReview")
void manualReviewRejectsEscalate() {
assertThatThrownBy(() -> aManualReviewOrder().escalateToManualReview())
- .isInstanceOf(StateMachineException.class);
+ .isInstanceOf(StateMachineException.class)
+ .hasMessageContaining("MANUAL_REVIEW"); // or relevant message
}🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/PayoutOrderTest.java`
around lines 657 - 662, Update the test manualReviewRejectsEscalate in
PayoutOrderTest to also assert the exception message contains the expected
terminal text: when calling aManualReviewOrder().escalateToManualReview()
capture the StateMachineException and add hasMessageContaining("terminal") (or
the same message used by other terminal-state tests) so the test verifies both
exception type and consistent message contract for terminal-state guards.
Comment on lines
+52
to
+71
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("generates a random redemptionId") | ||
| void generatesRandomRedemptionId() { | ||
| var redemption = StablecoinRedemption.create( | ||
| PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), REDEEMED_AMOUNT, | ||
| FIAT_RECEIVED, FIAT_CURRENCY, PARTNER, PARTNER_REFERENCE); | ||
|
|
||
| assertThat(redemption.redemptionId()).isNotNull(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("sets redeemedAt timestamp") | ||
| void setsRedeemedAt() { | ||
| var before = Instant.now(); | ||
| var redemption = StablecoinRedemption.create( | ||
| PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), REDEEMED_AMOUNT, | ||
| FIAT_RECEIVED, FIAT_CURRENCY, PARTNER, PARTNER_REFERENCE); | ||
|
|
||
| assertThat(redemption.redeemedAt()).isAfterOrEqualTo(before); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Strengthen the generated-field assertions.
These checks are too weak for factory-generated values: isNotNull() will not catch a constant redemptionId, and the one-sided redeemedAt assertion will still pass for future timestamps. Create two instances and bound the timestamp between before and after.
Suggested test hardening
`@Test`
`@DisplayName`("generates a random redemptionId")
void generatesRandomRedemptionId() {
- var redemption = StablecoinRedemption.create(
+ var first = StablecoinRedemption.create(
PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), REDEEMED_AMOUNT,
FIAT_RECEIVED, FIAT_CURRENCY, PARTNER, PARTNER_REFERENCE);
+ var second = StablecoinRedemption.create(
+ PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), REDEEMED_AMOUNT,
+ FIAT_RECEIVED, FIAT_CURRENCY, PARTNER, PARTNER_REFERENCE);
- assertThat(redemption.redemptionId()).isNotNull();
+ assertThat(first.redemptionId()).isNotNull();
+ assertThat(first.redemptionId()).isNotEqualTo(second.redemptionId());
}
`@Test`
`@DisplayName`("sets redeemedAt timestamp")
void setsRedeemedAt() {
var before = Instant.now();
var redemption = StablecoinRedemption.create(
PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), REDEEMED_AMOUNT,
FIAT_RECEIVED, FIAT_CURRENCY, PARTNER, PARTNER_REFERENCE);
+ var after = Instant.now();
- assertThat(redemption.redeemedAt()).isAfterOrEqualTo(before);
+ assertThat(redemption.redeemedAt())
+ .isAfterOrEqualTo(before)
+ .isBeforeOrEqualTo(after);
}As per coding guidelines, "Assert on meaningful values — avoid assertTrue(result != null)".
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/StablecoinRedemptionTest.java`
around lines 52 - 71, The tests use weak assertions: improve the factory
assertions in StablecoinRedemptionTest by creating two independent instances via
StablecoinRedemption.create and assert their redemptionId() values are non-null
and not equal to each other (to rule out a constant), and for redeemedAt()
capture an Instant before and after creation and assert redeemedAt() is >=
before and <= after to prevent future timestamps; update the tests referencing
StablecoinRedemption.create, redemptionId(), and redeemedAt() accordingly.
Comment on lines
+73
to
+82
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("populates stablecoin ticker with issuer and decimals") | ||
| void populatesStablecoinTicker() { | ||
| var redemption = StablecoinRedemption.create( | ||
| PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), REDEEMED_AMOUNT, | ||
| FIAT_RECEIVED, FIAT_CURRENCY, PARTNER, PARTNER_REFERENCE); | ||
|
|
||
| assertThat(redemption.stablecoin().ticker()).isEqualTo("USDC"); | ||
| assertThat(redemption.stablecoin().issuer()).isEqualTo("circle"); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assert decimals or rename the test.
Line 74 says this verifies issuer and decimals, but the body only checks ticker and issuer. Add a decimals assertion or narrow the display name so the spec matches the behavior.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/test/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/domain/model/StablecoinRedemptionTest.java`
around lines 73 - 82, The test populatesStablecoinTicker currently claims to
verify issuer and decimals but only asserts ticker and issuer; either add an
assertion for the decimals (e.g.,
assertThat(redemption.stablecoin().decimals()).isEqualTo(expectedDecimals))
after creating the StablecoinRedemption via
StablecoinRedemption.create(PAYOUT_ID, aStablecoinTicker(), ...) or change the
`@DisplayName` to remove "and decimals" so it reflects only ticker and issuer;
update the test method populatesStablecoinTicker accordingly and use the
stablecoin() accessor (ticker(), issuer(), decimals()) to make the chosen
change.
Comment on lines
+115
to
+117
| public static PayoutOrder aCompletedOrder() { | ||
| return aPayoutProcessingOrder().completePayout(PARTNER_REFERENCE, java.time.Instant.now()); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion | 🟠 Major
Remove the wall-clock dependency from the shared completed-order fixture.
aCompletedOrder() currently returns a different object on every call because of Instant.now(). That makes fixture-based equality and immutability assertions harder to trust. Use a fixed timestamp constant, or accept the completion time as a parameter and keep the default deterministic.
Suggested fixture change
+ public static final java.time.Instant COMPLETED_AT =
+ java.time.Instant.parse("2026-01-01T00:00:00Z");
+
public static PayoutOrder aCompletedOrder() {
- return aPayoutProcessingOrder().completePayout(PARTNER_REFERENCE, java.time.Instant.now());
+ return aPayoutProcessingOrder().completePayout(PARTNER_REFERENCE, COMPLETED_AT);
}🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In
`@fiat-off-ramp/fiat-off-ramp/src/testFixtures/java/com/stablecoin/payments/offramp/fixtures/PayoutOrderFixtures.java`
around lines 115 - 117, The aCompletedOrder() fixture is non-deterministic due
to Instant.now(); change it to use a fixed Instant constant (e.g., COMPLETED_AT)
or make the method accept an Instant parameter with a default constant to ensure
deterministic returns. Update aCompletedOrder() to call
aPayoutProcessingOrder().completePayout(PARTNER_REFERENCE, COMPLETED_AT) (or
delegate to a new overloaded aCompletedOrder(Instant completedAt)) and add the
COMPLETED_AT constant in the fixture class so tests get stable, comparable
objects.
This was referenced Mar 10, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
canApply()queries, immutability assertionsPayoutOrderFixturesin testFixtures with state factories for all 10 PayoutOrder statesTest Breakdown
Test plan
./gradlew :fiat-off-ramp:fiat-off-ramp:test)Closes STA-148
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes