codecov[bot]
commented
1 year ago Codecov Report
Base: 90.77% // Head: 90.94% // Increases project coverage by +0.16% :tada:
Coverage data is based on head (
16ca840) compared to base (5f78824). Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #602 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 90.77% 90.94% +0.16% ========================================== Files 128 128 Lines 8436 8436 ========================================== + Hits 7658 7672 +14 + Misses 778 764 -14 ``` | [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/Crunch-io/rcrunch/pull/602?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Crunch-io) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [R/variable-folder.R](https://codecov.io/gh/Crunch-io/rcrunch/pull/602/diff?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Crunch-io#diff-Ui92YXJpYWJsZS1mb2xkZXIuUg==) | `100.00% <ø> (ø)` | | | [R/folders.R](https://codecov.io/gh/Crunch-io/rcrunch/pull/602/diff?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Crunch-io#diff-Ui9mb2xkZXJzLlI=) | `92.92% <100.00%> (+12.38%)` | :arrow_up: | | [R/hide-variables.R](https://codecov.io/gh/Crunch-io/rcrunch/pull/602/diff?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Crunch-io#diff-Ui9oaWRlLXZhcmlhYmxlcy5S) | `78.78% <100.00%> (+2.12%)` | :arrow_up: | Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us [how you rate us](https://about.codecov.io/nps?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Crunch-io). Have a feature suggestion? [Share it here.](https://app.codecov.io/gh/feedback/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Crunch-io):umbrella: View full report at Codecov.
:loudspeaker: Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.
Missed a place where we relied on the old style of public variables in the root of the variables directory instead of using the public folder.
I also inlined the logic of
rootVariableFolder()because I don't think we ever want to use it directly so we can avoid these bugs.