fix: Improve the robustness of workspace SVG tests.

[BenHenning]

The basics

• I validated my changes

The details

Resolves

Fixes #8676

Proposed Changes

This largely reduces the dependence on direct value testing and instead updates clean-up tests to verify logic based on relative positioning. This guards against potential system-specific flakes that can occur when there are subtle calculation differences on different systems.

Note that the approach for improving robustness of the specific tests that were failing also provided an opportunity to clean up all of the other workspace SVG tests to make use of the same or similar helpers. I'm hoping that the latest versions are much more readable than they were previously.

Reason for Changes

For unknown reasons, different systems (such as OSX and specific versions of Ubuntu) would lead to differences in calculations for workspace tests. The tests really only needed to verify relative positioning between blocks, so this PR updates them to do exactly that (rather than verifying a block is at a specific relative position). This does introduce a bit more logic into the test, but it's managed by isolating this logic to helpers that help to self-document them and make it easier to verify the correctness via review.

Test Coverage

This PR is only changing tests. Technically the new helpers would benefit from direct tests, but this doesn't seem necessary given that they are relatively simple (and thus easy to verify).

Documentation

No documentation needs to be updated.

Additional Information

I found a flake in different tests while developing this and cataloged my findings in #8688.

[conventional-commit-lint-gcf]

🤖 I detect that the PR title and the commit message differ and there's only one commit. To use the PR title for the commit history, you can use Github's automerge feature with squashing, or use automerge label. Good luck human!

-- conventional-commit-lint bot
https://conventionalcommits.org/

[BenHenning]

Self-reviewed changes.

[BenHenning]

Note that the Ubuntu 22.x failure is one of the tests documented in #8688.

[BenHenning]

NB: I'm ignoring the conventional message failure for now since I'll likely end up merging develop into this branch (and thus avoid the thing it's nitpicking on with the single commit scenario).

[BenHenning]

PTAL @cpcallen as well. Could you maybe run the tests locally since you were able to consistently trigger the failure before (and I wasn't)? It would be nice to see that it's also working for you.