100% test coverage #1074
Merged
100% test coverage #1074
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Like with previous PR aiming to increase our test coverage (#1058), doing so this time revealed a few places where code was unused, or could be rewritten to be better optimized, removed, or made easier to read. One find that is yet to be addressed here is how we copy the whole `ast.found.refs` object into `ast.all_refs`, which surely comes with a cost that seems unnecessary, given we can use `ast.found.refs` directly instead. But since there are a few consumers, and they are not **exactly** identical (`all_refs` contains import refs too), I'll follow up on that in a later PR. I'm also adding the codecov badge to the README to make it easy to see when our coverage drops. But I'm not as convinced we should fail PRs when coverage isn't 100% as I was before, as it might make for a worse contributor experience. Fixes #918 Signed-off-by: Anders Eknert <anders@styra.com>
srenatus
pushed a commit
to srenatus/regal
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 1, 2024
Like with previous PR aiming to increase our test coverage (StyraInc#1058), doing so this time revealed a few places where code was unused, or could be rewritten to be better optimized, removed, or made easier to read. One find that is yet to be addressed here is how we copy the whole `ast.found.refs` object into `ast.all_refs`, which surely comes with a cost that seems unnecessary, given we can use `ast.found.refs` directly instead. But since there are a few consumers, and they are not **exactly** identical (`all_refs` contains import refs too), I'll follow up on that in a later PR. I'm also adding the codecov badge to the README to make it easy to see when our coverage drops. But I'm not as convinced we should fail PRs when coverage isn't 100% as I was before, as it might make for a worse contributor experience. Fixes StyraInc#918 Signed-off-by: Anders Eknert <anders@styra.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Like with previous PR aiming to increase our test coverage (#1058), doing so this time revealed a few places where code was unused, or could be rewritten to be better optimized, removed, or made easier to read.
One find that is yet to be addressed here is how we copy the whole
ast.found.refsobject intoast.all_refs, which surely comes with a cost that seems unnecessary, given we can useast.found.refsdirectly instead. But since there are a few consumers, and they are not exactly identical (all_refscontains import refs too), I'll follow up on that in a later PR.I'm also adding the codecov badge to the README to make it easy to see when our coverage drops. But I'm not as convinced we should fail PRs when coverage isn't 100% as I was before, as it might make for a worse contributor experience.
Fixes #918