feat: versioning bdd test support with overridden TokenType function

[lukelee-sl]

Description:

• Add ability to define an alternate root directory for contract files
• Add to the @contract annotation to define a variant system contract location
• Remove 16c translator/call class for BalanceOf
• Add translator/call class for TokenType
• Add a test utilizing the 16c version of TokenType

Related issue(s):

Fixes #17671

Checklist

• Documented (Code comments, README, etc.)
• Tested (unit, integration, etc.)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 73.33333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.99%. Comparing base (8590a98) to head (2ae8467).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...s/tokentype/address_0x16c/TokenTypeTranslator.java	57.14%	3 Missing ⚠️
...contract/impl/exec/utils/SystemContractMethod.java	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #17723      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     68.97%   68.99%   +0.01%     
- Complexity    22949    22953       +4     
============================================
  Files          2646     2646              
  Lines         99322    99309      -13     
  Branches      10255    10253       -2     
============================================
+ Hits          68512    68516       +4     
+ Misses        26927    26910      -17     
  Partials       3883     3883              

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...mpl/exec/processors/Hts0x167TranslatorsModule.java	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...mpl/exec/processors/Hts0x16cTranslatorsModule.java	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...act/impl/exec/processors/HtsTranslatorsModule.java	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...contract/impl/exec/processors/ProcessorModule.java	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...emcontracts/hts/balanceof/BalanceOfTranslator.java	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...c/systemcontracts/hts/tokentype/TokenTypeCall.java	92.30% <ø> (ø)
...s/tokentype/address_0x167/TokenTypeTranslator.java	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...contract/impl/exec/utils/SystemContractMethod.java	86.71% <75.00%> (+0.09%)	⬆️
...s/tokentype/address_0x16c/TokenTypeTranslator.java	75.00% <57.14%> (ø)

[codacy-production]

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation	Diff coverage
✅ +0.01% (target: -1.00%)	✅ 73.33%

Coverage variation details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Coverage
Common ancestor commit (8590a98)	99105	72243	72.90%
Head commit (2ae8467)	99092 (-13)	72247 (+4)	72.91% (+0.01%)

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Diff coverage
Pull request (#17723)	15	11	73.33%

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

_{Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more}

[david-bakin-sl]

I basically like this a lot and think this versioning approach will really be nice and rather easy going forward.

(I know this is still in draft but I like it already.)

But of course I can't leave well enough alone so I've suggested more work for this PR which you can either agree with or not. !!!

[david-bakin-sl]

BTW the unit test problem is from BalanceOfTranslatorTest.validateNonMatchingContractIDTest - I bet you forgot to revert something there when backing out the BalanceOf method "example".

[lukelee-sl]

BTW the unit test problem is from BalanceOfTranslatorTest.validateNonMatchingContractIDTest - I bet you forgot to revert something there when backing out the BalanceOf method "example".

yup

[stoyanov-st]

Thanks @lukelee-sl
I think we are on the right direction here.
Left some comments and you should change the tag of the PR as it is not only adding tests

[stoyanov-st]

Thanks for this @lukelee-sl !
LGTM 🚀

[david-bakin-sl]

LGTM (but I'm leaving a couple of questions open for your consideration anyway)