Closed ecstrema closed 3 years ago
Hi, thanks for the contribution!
I did not add tests.
Well, that's a problem, because without tests it's impossible to spot regressions. And since the primary goal of this project is to not be another Doxygen where each new release is a surprise bag of new bugs and old regressions which then waste time of all users, I need the tests :)
From a quick look, it seems your patch supports only private variables. What about private types and private static functions also? For the testing the most essential part is crafting an input file that lists all possibilities and then verifies everything looks as expected (and of course also that no existing tests started failing). I can do that, but that will take some time.
I'll have a look for the testing.
Merging #132 into master will decrease coverage by
10.09%
. The diff coverage isn/a
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #132 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 98.00% 87.90% -10.10%
===========================================
Files 27 22 -5
Lines 6454 2612 -3842
Branches 44 44
===========================================
- Hits 6325 2296 -4029
- Misses 129 316 +187
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
plugins/m/sphinx.py | 46.64% <0.00%> (-53.36%) |
:arrow_down: |
plugins/dot2svg.py | 97.61% <0.00%> (-2.39%) |
:arrow_down: |
plugins/m/htmlsanity.py | 90.80% <0.00%> (-2.30%) |
:arrow_down: |
documentation/test/_search_test_metadata.py | ||
documentation/python.py | ||
documentation/_search.py | ||
documentation/test/test_search.py |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f45a8b0...120430c. Read the comment docs.
I just separated the second commit into a new PR, didn't look at the tests yet
Add support for the EXTRACT_PRIVATE doxygen configuration option. Private members were previously ignored, as stated in the main page
Why things aren't perfect: 1) there is no
virtual
label like there is forprivate
andoverride
That would be a plus, but I have no idea where to check for that. 2) My fix seems too simple to take care of all cases. Please review thoroughly 3) I did not add tests.