Functional options for steps

[maxdml]

Our current method for capturing the reflection name of a step is flawed. The typed erase function (anonymous) always has the same name, and thus every call to RunAsStep overwrites it. This of course results in wrong data in the operation_results table.

There is no good way to associated a unique key that the interface method can use on this map. Hence, let's just move to the cleaner functional options interface to handle step options, voiding the need for the in-memory map.

Added a test (TestSteps/checkStepName) that fails without this change.

[kraftp]

Good fix, but why did no existing test catch this bug?

[kraftp]

Also, could anything else have a similar problem? What about workflows?

[maxdml]

Good fix, but why did no existing test catch this bug?

Because we never had a tests that checked the step names after consecutive workflow / run a step invocations.

That being said I wasn't able to reproduce the exact bug the widget store showed. The problem became quickly obvious when debugging, so I moved on to the fix.

could anything else have a similar problem? What about workflows?

Thank you for raising the question, there is actually an additional bug where a user could register two different workflows under the same custom name. Which I fixed in 6f8ced2.

[kraftp]

Good fix, but why did no existing test catch this bug?

Because we never had a tests that checked the step names after consecutive workflow / run a step invocations.

That being said I wasn't able to reproduce the exact bug the widget store showed. The problem became quickly obvious when debugging, so I moved on to the fix.

could anything else have a similar problem? What about workflows?

Thank you for raising the question, there is actually an additional bug where a user could register two different workflows under the same custom name. Which I fixed in 6f8ced2.

That doesn't answer the question. The bug I observed wasn't a failure to write step names, it was a failure in recovery. Why did our recovery tests not catch it?