codecov-commenter
commented
1 year ago Codecov Report
Base: 89.82% // Head: 89.83% // Increases project coverage by +0.01% :tada:
Coverage data is based on head (
e2f7ef2) compared to base (14c18e5). Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.
:mega: This organization is not using Codecov’s GitHub App Integration. We recommend you install it so Codecov can continue to function properly for your repositories. Learn more
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #98 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 89.82% 89.83% +0.01% ========================================== Files 20 20 Lines 1907 1909 +2 Branches 60 60 ========================================== + Hits 1713 1715 +2 Misses 134 134 Partials 60 60 ``` | [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/greglook/cljstyle/pull/98?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Greg+Look) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [src/cljstyle/format/indent.clj](https://codecov.io/gh/greglook/cljstyle/pull/98?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Greg+Look#diff-c3JjL2NsanN0eWxlL2Zvcm1hdC9pbmRlbnQuY2xq) | `93.56% <100.00%> (+0.07%)` | :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=Greg+Look). 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=Greg+Look):umbrella: View full report at Codecov.
:loudspeaker: Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.
Fix #97
Sorry about opening this before the underlying issue has been responded to, I had some extra time and thought I'd try my proposed fix.
A better solution might be to introduce a new rule instead, or add extra parameters to the rule as this would change some behaviour when leading forms are missing (see my comment in the tests).