# Babe initialization in tests

**URL:** https://forum.duniter.org/t/babe-initialization-in-tests/11553
**Category:** Duniter-v2
**Created:** [13 September 2023 13:36 UTC](https://forum.duniter.org/t/babe-initialization-in-tests/11553 "2023-09-13T13:36:55Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![HugoTrentesaux](https://forum.duniter.org/user_avatar/forum.duniter.org/hugotrentesaux/32/6396_2.png) [@HugoTrentesaux](https://forum.duniter.org/u/HugoTrentesaux)
#### Post date: [14 September 2023 08:03 UTC](https://forum.duniter.org/t/babe-initialization-in-tests/11553/4 "2023-09-14T08:03:51Z")

</div>

Ok. Ce serait embêtant d’avoir des tests qui passent alors qu’il ne devraient pas juste parce que le mock est incohérent. On pourrait essayer de réécrire ces mocks en s’inspirant de polkadot :

```rust
fn run_to_block(n: u32) {
	assert!(System::block_number() < n);
	while System::block_number() < n {
		let block_number = System::block_number();
		AllPalletsWithSystem::on_finalize(block_number);
		System::set_block_number(block_number + 1);
		maybe_new_session(block_number + 1);
		AllPalletsWithSystem::on_initialize(block_number + 1);
	}
}

```

Je vais essayer de faire ça dans la MR de mise à jour après avoir réglé [le problème des providers](https://forum.duniter.org/t/noproviders-error/11554).

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.duniter.org/t/babe-initialization-in-tests/11553)._