codecov[bot]
commented
1 year ago Codecov Report
Attention: 6 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.
Comparison is base (
0f23255) 69.58% compared to head (dcd7870) 70.78%.
| Files | Patch % | Lines |
|---|---|---|
| FHEM/00_SIGNALduino.pm | 88.46% | 6 Missing :warning: |
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #1169 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 69.58% 70.78% +1.19% ========================================== Files 133 138 +5 Lines 10051 10104 +53 Branches 1623 1577 -46 ========================================== + Hits 6994 7152 +158 + Misses 1705 1643 -62 + Partials 1352 1309 -43 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1169/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [fhem](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1169/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `61.26% <88.67%> (+1.47%)` | :arrow_up: | | [modules](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1169/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `70.78% <88.67%> (+1.19%)` | :arrow_up: | | [perl](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1169/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `90.04% <ø> (-0.09%)` | :arrow_down: | | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1169/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `70.78% <88.67%> (+1.19%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
sidey79
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
[ ] Bugfix (please link issue)
[ ] Feature enhancement
[ ] Documentation update
[ ] Unittest enhancement
[x] other
What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here, if this describes the current behavior)
Calling the Debug output must be checked every time it may be needed. This causes seral checks and also while running unittests this causes serval uncoverable paths.
Debug is behind a coderef stored in the device hash If debug is enabled, then FHEM Debug sub is called if not, then we return from a anonymous sub which does nothing.
no
Calls for retrieving attribute debug value can be reduced later on.