GDScript: Replace assert() with Utils.check() in tests

[dalexeev]

assert() is not evaluated in non-debug build, so some conditions in our GDScript tests are currently not checked in non-debug builds. Please do not use assert() for anything other than testing the assert() itself. Thanks to @kleonc.

[kleonc]

LGTM! 👍 The changes look trivial.

The only potential concerns:

• Any reason why const Utils = preload("../../utils.notest.gd") was used before over class_name Utils?
• Any reason why push_error was used before over printerr?

[dalexeev]

• Any reason why const Utils = preload("../../utils.notest.gd") was used before over class_name Utils?

I wasn't sure previously if class_name is supported in the testing system. I probably confused it with the --test gdscript-{tokenizer,parser,compiler} commands.

• Any reason why push_error was used before over printerr?

push_error() and push_warning() are handled in a special way. >> lines are added to the beginning of .out files. These lines are removed in non-debug builds, since GDScript warnings are not produced in non-debug builds.

There is also an issue with the fact that an active debugger is required to get the GDScript call stack. For this reason Utils.check() is less convenient than assert() when analyzing failed tests. But I have not figured out how to get around this, except to add the required parameter message to Utils.check().

[kleonc]

There is also an issue with the fact that an active debugger is required to get the GDScript call stack. For this reason Utils.check() is less convenient than assert() when analyzing failed tests. But I have not figured out how to get around this, except to add the required parameter message to Utils.check().

Hmm, kinda hacky but wouldn't adding assert(condition) into Utils.check do the thing? I mean it shouldn't print on its own anyway when everything is fine, and if the condition fails it would output the stack trace in the debug builds for easy finding the failing line, no? 🤔

[dalexeev]

wouldn't adding assert(condition) into Utils.check do the thing?

No, assert(false) in Utils.check() will only point to its location in utils.notest.gd, backtrace will not be available even in debug builds, it requires an active debugger. But if #91006 is merged, we will be able to improve Utils.check(), as in the current implementation the PR removes the requirement for an active debugger.

[akien-mga]

Thanks!