Closed NoahTheDuke closed 1 year ago
The description is slightly more specific than necessary. The result of the tail call of test is returned, not just assertions.
Base: 75.74% // Head: 75.54% // Decreases project coverage by -0.21%
:warning:
Coverage data is based on head (
4621cca
) compared to base (8e9cf5f
). Patch coverage: 74.28% of modified lines in pull request are covered.
:umbrella: View full report at Codecov.
:loudspeaker: Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.
I would have similar concerns as to the original PR (changing a fundamental part of the code that actually runs tests), but this partly reverts a previous change and we have tests for both.
As I've thought about it more, I do wonder whether assertions in fixtures is really the best approach. Still, I don't think the inadvisability is a good reason to break compatibility, and I think the behavior this PR implements (returning the merged testable) makes more sense anyway.
Thanks so much. Sorry for the hassle. A real clear cut case of being too clever with my refactoring instead of touching the minimal lines to affect the desired change.
Released in v1.76.1230
[lambdaisland/kaocha "1.76.1230"] ;; deps.edn
{lambdaisland/kaocha {:mvn/version "1.76.1230"}} ;; project.clj
Moving the
type/report-count
portion oftestable/-run :var
intotest-var
wrapped it in thejoin-fixtures
calls, meaning that theis
assertion was in the tail position and returned the result (a boolean) instead of returning the mergedtestable
object.To fix, I've pulled the
type/report-count
portion back intotestable/-run :var
and have added a top-level test that fail without this change.Closes #384