Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.88%. Comparing base (a378c2c) to head (71e20a7).

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##              dev    #8412   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.87%   88.88%           
=======================================
  Files         414      414           
  Lines       12292    12292           
  Branches     2455     2455           
=======================================
+ Hits        10925    10926    +1     
+ Misses        837      836    -1     
  Partials      530      530           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Hi. Thanks for contribution.

UnitTests

It says unit tests, but I don't see any new unit tests and our current unit tests didn't cover this issue.
You need to write a bUnit tests that caused this issue #8411 without your applied fix, and then it should pass with your fix.
It's mandatory to include a bUnit when it comes to bug fixes.

Awesome. How did our unit tests not catch that? Clearly there is a hole in the test suite. Will you please add a simple test that goes into stack overflow without the fix? Thanks!

Edit: Haha, you beat me @ScarletKuro

Awesome. How did our unit tests not catch that? Clearly there is a hole in the test suite. Will you please add a simple test that goes into stack overflow without the fix? Thanks!

All UnitTests covering Option was changed to Value. There are no tests for Option anymore, and therefore it passed :)

Hi. Thanks for contribution.

UnitTests

It says unit tests, but I don't see any new unit tests and our current unit tests didn't cover this issue. You need to write a bUnit tests that caused this issue #8411 without your applied fix, and then it should pass with your fix. It's mandatory to include a bUnit when it comes to bug fixes.

I will write a test for it now

When making backwards compatibility changes, we should always keep the old tests. That was an error on the previous PR. Perhaps you can look at the previous PR and resurrect them. You may have to pragma the obsolete usage. I suspect that the PR that made the changes also did the same for the other components that were changed to Value.

All UnitTests covering Option was changed to Value. There are no tests for Option anymore, and therefore it passed :)

Oh, I see now how this regression happened. It was introduced in this PR #7892, specifically this file change https://github.com/MudBlazor/MudBlazor/pull/7892/files#diff-dc31ee09bdb8429effe29754907962c4f424a061132113699e2f83ae05943588
Since all tests indeed switched to Value it was never found.

Added a single test for it now. I guess that is good enough, as it is a simple fix. I tried first without the fix, and it just ran until it stopped without any good feedback on what happened. It does not pass. After the change to return Value, it passes :)

Added a single test for it now. I guess that is good enough

I think that's good enough, imo.

@ScarletKuro Is it possible to create a v6.18.1 or a prerelease that includes this fix?

I will simply make a release now. It'll be on nuget shortly