codecov[bot]
commented
10 months ago Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Comparison is base (
c3886c3) 98.86% compared to head (c4c1130) 98.86%.
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #38 +/- ## ========================================= Coverage 98.86% 98.86% Complexity 189 189 ========================================= Files 9 9 Lines 528 528 ========================================= Hits 522 522 Misses 6 6 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/inpsyde/modularity/pull/38/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=inpsyde) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/inpsyde/modularity/pull/38/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=inpsyde) | `98.86% <ø> (ø)` | | 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=inpsyde#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more. | [Files](https://app.codecov.io/gh/inpsyde/modularity/pull/38?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=inpsyde) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [src/Properties/ThemeProperties.php](https://app.codecov.io/gh/inpsyde/modularity/pull/38?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=inpsyde#diff-c3JjL1Byb3BlcnRpZXMvVGhlbWVQcm9wZXJ0aWVzLnBocA==) | `90.62% <ø> (ø)` | |:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
It fixes the retrieval of theme information defined in the file header.
What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
We are trying to access the file header information using the "display name".
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
We are accessing the file header using the keys.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)
No.
Other information:
None.