refactor: re-enable default_deserializer coverage

[sobolevn]

This function is rather important, we need to add more tests if it is not covered, not ignore it.

Let's see the results.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 97.78%. Comparing base (d478219) to head (39cec47).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4430      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.83%   97.78%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         296      296              
  Lines       15286    15308      +22     
  Branches     1711     1720       +9     
==========================================
+ Hits        14955    14969      +14     
- Misses        189      196       +7     
- Partials      142      143       +1     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

Documentation preview will be available shortly at https://litestar-org.github.io/litestar-docs-preview/4430

[sobolevn]

Here's the coverage result: https://app.codecov.io/gh/litestar-org/litestar/commit/39cec47ffa145a7ef8a12d78bd06fd2d2253489e/indirect-changes?dropdown=coverage&el=desc

I will add tests for the new red paths.

[sobolevn]

@provinzkraut I have a hard time figuring out how to actually test this 🤔
Any ideas? :)

[provinzkraut]

Hmm. For L119-L124 there exists a case that should cover this:

litestar/tests/unit/test_signature/test_validation.py

Line 294 in 9a3bd38

def test_validate_subscribed_generics() -> None:

At least that's the test added in #3519, which introduced these lines in the first place.

Apparently it's not testing what it's supposed to be testing. Maybe this is a test regression, and that case is getting caught somewhere upstream now?

Would be a good starting point for investigating I think.

[euri10]

def test_x() -> None:
    d = default_deserializer(list[int], [1,2,3,4])
    assert d == [1,2,3,4]

this takes the red path I think, or you're talking about the line 125-126 ?

[sobolevn]

@provinzkraut this test does not trigger the red path :(
I started with it.

@euri10 I guess that this test it so not quite correct, because we don't use default_deserializer directly, it is an internal callback. I have to somehow trigger it from a layer above.