Handle errors when getting modifications

[FranckLecuyer]

PR Summary

Handle errors when getting modifications

based on PR : #58
to be merged together with PR : gridsuite/network-modification-server#775

[coderabbitai]

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

monitor-worker-server/src/test/java/org/gridsuite/monitor/worker/server/processes/commons/steps/ApplyModificationsStepTest.java (1)

102-119: Consider asserting the specific exception type.

The mocks are now properly set up (addressing previous feedback). However, the production code throws PowsyblException (as seen in ApplyModificationsStep.java line 94), but the test asserts RuntimeException.class. While this works because PowsyblException extends RuntimeException, using the specific type provides better test precision and ensures other runtime exceptions aren't inadvertently caught.

♻️ Proposed fix for more precise assertion

-        assertThrows(RuntimeException.class, () -> applyModificationsStep.execute(stepContext));
+        assertThrows(PowsyblException.class, () -> applyModificationsStep.execute(stepContext));

Add the import:

import com.powsybl.commons.PowsyblException;

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In
`@monitor-worker-server/src/test/java/org/gridsuite/monitor/worker/server/processes/commons/steps/ApplyModificationsStepTest.java`
around lines 102 - 119, Change the test to assert the specific PowsyblException
instead of RuntimeException: in ApplyModificationsStepTest (method
executeApplyModificationsFailWhenModificationsAreMissing) replace
assertThrows(RuntimeException.class, ...) with
assertThrows(PowsyblException.class, ...) and add the import
com.powsybl.commons.PowsyblException; this aligns the test with the actual
exception thrown by ApplyModificationsStep (PowsyblException).

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In
`@monitor-worker-server/src/test/java/org/gridsuite/monitor/worker/server/processes/commons/steps/ApplyModificationsStepTest.java`:
- Around line 102-119: Change the test to assert the specific PowsyblException
instead of RuntimeException: in ApplyModificationsStepTest (method
executeApplyModificationsFailWhenModificationsAreMissing) replace
assertThrows(RuntimeException.class, ...) with
assertThrows(PowsyblException.class, ...) and add the import
com.powsybl.commons.PowsyblException; this aligns the test with the actual
exception thrown by ApplyModificationsStep (PowsyblException).

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 9611a4fb-9959-4409-8826-b085c9b2002e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ddc3801 and 60a59a3.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• monitor-worker-server/src/test/java/org/gridsuite/monitor/worker/server/processes/commons/steps/ApplyModificationsStepTest.java

[antoinebhs]

I'm not sure to understand why we need this complexity?
On main, we know the ID we want:
networkModificationRestService.getModifications(modificationIds);
and the ID we get List modificationInfos.getUuid()
Why can't we deduce the missing modifications ?

[antoinebhs]

Some maybe to discuss? let me know

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[antoinebhs]

Code OK 👍