concoredocker.java has zero test coverage for read/write/unchanged/initVal API

[avinxshKD]

TestLiteralEval.java only tests the literalEval() parser. The actual API methods... read(), write(), unchanged(), initVal(), have no tests at all.

This means there's no verification that:

• write() produces a correctly formatted file ([simtime+delta, val1, val2, ...])

• read() parses it back and strips simtime from the returned data

• unchanged() returns true when data hasn't changed and false after a new write

• simtime advances correctly across iterations when delta is applied

• initVal() correctly extracts simtime and returns remaining values

to be added: a new TestConcoredockerApi.java that exercises the file-based IPC path using temp directories:

• Write to a file, read it back, assert data roundtrips correctly

• Run multiple write- read iterations, assert simtime advances with delta

• Verify unchanged() state transitions with real file content

• Verify initVal() parsing and simtime extraction

• Confirm output files match the Python wire format ([simtime, ...])

Builds on top of #463 (once methods are accessible).

[avinxshKD]

Hey @pradeeban was going through concoredocker.java and noticed TestLiteralEval.java only covers the parser read, write, unchanged, and initVal have zero test coverage. Planning to add TestConcoredockerApi.java with real temp directory I/O once #463 lands. OK to proceed?

lmk if this direction is good for java

[pradeeban]

ok, go ahead. Given that I consider the Java implementation to be largely a toy, it does not surprise me though to have zero test coverage.

[avinxshKD]

@pradeeban yeah makes sense, On it. Finishing up the fix in #463 first so the methods are accessible, then follow with a lean Java test PR using real file I/O plus simtime/delta checks. So we get practical coverage without overengineering.

[avinxshKD]

Hey @pradeeban was implementing this one as test-focused. If I hit small Java issues while wiring tests, prefer I include minimal fixes here or open follow up?