Closed DrAlexD closed 11 months ago
Attention: 3 lines
in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.
Comparison is base (
0063c8b
) 78.33% compared to head (7a3b256
) 78.30%.
Files | Patch % | Lines |
---|---|---|
...l/diktat/ruleset/rules/chapter3/MagicNumberRule.kt | 76.92% | 0 Missing and 3 partials :warning: |
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
166 files ±0 166 suites ±0 6m 4s :stopwatch: + 2m 4s 1 430 tests +4 1 392 :heavy_check_mark: +4 38 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0 2 809 runs +4 2 771 :heavy_check_mark: +4 38 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0
Results for commit 7a3b2569. ± Comparison against base commit 0063c8ba.
:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.
166 files ±0 166 suites ±0 7m 6s :stopwatch: -26s 1 430 tests +4 1 413 :heavy_check_mark: +4 17 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0 2 809 runs +4 2 792 :heavy_check_mark: +4 17 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0
Results for commit 7a3b2569. ± Comparison against base commit 0063c8ba.
:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.
What's done:
ignoreLocalVariableDeclaration
didn't take into account variables withval
.ignorePropertyDeclaration
also found ranges and local variables, for which there are corresponding configurationsignoreRanges
andignoreLocalVariableDeclaration
.ignorePairsCreatedUsingTo
for ignoring pairs created usingto
.Closes #1826