Closed WillLP-code closed 6 months ago
Attention: 1 lines
in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.
Comparison is base (
15179c5
) 95.27% compared to head (abe0bf5
) 95.29%. Report is 47 commits behind head on main.
Files | Patch % | Lines |
---|---|---|
lac_validator/rules/rule_utils.py | 95.65% | 1 Missing :warning: |
:exclamation: Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Would it make sense now to move the valid_date
function out of the individual rules and share that as common code between all of them? Rather than having separate and slightly different instances directly coded in each rule?
closes #672
This is another slightly weird one. I cannibalised the code from 632 to do it, but have changed it to allow any and all date values to be ZZs in line with the wording of the rule, but I'm not sure if that's how the guidance is meant to be interpreted.
I do wonder if this is possible without a for loop. I tried to do it from scratch but realised if 632 was in, it may be the best way of doing it.