ext/hash: cleaned up test

[NickSdot]

Not at all asserted; no point to keep the noise.

[NickSdot]

@LamentXU123 another no owner; one-liner.

[LamentXU123]

I indeed do not know how these extension works. But since these test fixers are accepted by multiple maintainers I think this is good to merge.

[iliaal]

@NickSdot Overall looks ok, but why are we removing $e->getTraceAsString()?

[NickSdot]

@NickSdot Overall looks ok, but why are we removing $e->getTraceAsString()?

@iliaal bloat for no reason; it is not asserted :)

[iliaal]

The idea (i think) was that if the test fails there is more data available in the diff to show why.

[NickSdot]

The idea (i think) was that if the test fails there is more data available in the diff to show why.

When I look at the text in hash_update() I'd assume it's a debug left-over. 😂 Anyway, if you think it adds value I can add it back. Note: there are 649 other non-asserted that also don't do that; only 3 including this one do it. So if it adds value here we maybe should consider to make it a standard? Your call.

[iliaal]

The test expects success via "Done" so any failure path is predictably not exercised, since the goal of the change you are adding is to add more context via class name, I wouldn't remove $e->getTraceAsString() it does no harm (imho) and if the test ever fails there is more info there...

[NickSdot]

The test expects success via "Done" so any failure path is predictably not exercised, since the goal of the change you are adding is to add more context via class name, I wouldn't remove $e->getTraceAsString() it does no harm (imho) and if the test ever fails there is more info there...

Added it back. All that's left is a tiny style change; sorry I made two people busy for that.

[iliaal]

Thanks for the change ;-)

[NickSdot]

@iliaal, may I ask your general opinion to:

there are 649 other non-asserted that also don't do that; only 3 including this one do it. So if it adds value here we maybe should consider to make it a standard?

Worth to do it or nah?