Closed dougthor42 closed 1 year ago
Merging #79 (bba23e0) into main (2aab58b) will increase coverage by
1.91%
. The diff coverage is100.00%
.
: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
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #79 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.88% 84.80% +1.91%
==========================================
Files 16 18 +2
Lines 1011 1033 +22
Branches 153 152 -1
==========================================
+ Hits 838 876 +38
+ Misses 135 120 -15
+ Partials 38 37 -1
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
unittests | 84.80% <100.00%> (+1.91%) |
:arrow_up: |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
pyvisa_sim/devices.py | 94.44% <ø> (+0.41%) |
:arrow_up: |
pyvisa_sim/sessions/serial.py | 68.75% <100.00%> (+7.21%) |
:arrow_up: |
pyvisa_sim/sessions/session.py | 71.95% <100.00%> (-0.34%) |
:arrow_down: |
pyvisa_sim/testsuite/test_all.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
pyvisa_sim/testsuite/test_common.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
pyvisa_sim/testsuite/test_serial.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.
@MatthieuDartiailh is there anything blocking this from getting merged?
I am just slow. Just so that it does not get lost could you add a change log entry and I will merge ?
By curiosity, will you be able to address #80 ?
No worries! I completely understand. And yes I expect to be able to take a look at #80.
Fixes #72.
While working on this, I noticed that this block
https://github.com/pyvisa/pyvisa-sim/blob/2aab58ba092043a89628787729175acbba8695c8/pyvisa_sim/sessions/serial.py#L84-L88
was not touched by unit tests. So I added a test for it, as the proposed change to
device.Device.write
will impact that code.And then while creating the test for
serial.py
, I found thatcommon.iter_bytes
was also not covered by tests, so I made a test case for that.I also add a test to ensure that logging is recording the full string, not just 1 character at a time.
Now that all impacted code is covered by tests, I implemented the minor change to
device.Device.write
,session.MessageBasedSession.write
andserial.SerialInstrumentSession.write
to fix the logging issue.