Closed Drvi closed 2 years ago
Merging #2 (19dbc3c) into master (c504c5d) will increase coverage by
0.45%
. The diff coverage is95.45%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 87.56% 88.01% +0.45%
==========================================
Files 21 21
Lines 2332 2337 +5
==========================================
+ Hits 2042 2057 +15
+ Misses 290 280 -10
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/ProtocolBuffers.jl | 66.66% <ø> (ø) |
|
src/codec/Codecs.jl | 88.88% <ø> (ø) |
|
src/codec/vbyte.jl | 98.78% <ø> (-0.02%) |
:arrow_down: |
src/codegen/names.jl | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
src/codegen/types.jl | 89.58% <ø> (ø) |
|
src/lexing/Lexers.jl | 90.28% <ø> (+0.31%) |
:arrow_up: |
src/codegen/toplevel_definitions.jl | 96.22% <92.30%> (+6.12%) |
:arrow_up: |
src/codegen/modules.jl | 83.33% <100.00%> (+0.63%) |
:arrow_up: |
src/parsing/Parsers.jl | 67.46% <100.00%> (+0.80%) |
:arrow_up: |
... and 2 more |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c504c5d...19dbc3c. Read the comment docs.
Until now, when a proto file didn't have a
package
specifier, we created a simple julia script out of it, without wrapping the generated contents in a module. This PR changes that -- by default, we'll wrap these in a module which takes the same name as the generated julia file. E.g. if we translatetest.proto
, we get atest_pb.jl
file containing atest_pb
module. This will make including such files a bit safer, as they won't immediately pollute the enclosing namespace. Settingalways_use_modules = false
recovers the original behavior (nopackage
specifier => no module).For context, this is how we treat proto files that do contain
package
specifier. E.g. if a filetest.proto
containspackage = foo.bar
the following structure will be generated: