Closed tk3369 closed 4 years ago
Interesting, it didn't pass CI because Base.return_types
in v1.0 works differently:
For this function:
f3(x::Number) = x + 1.0;
v1.4.1
julia> Base.return_types(f3, Tuple{Complex})
1-element Array{Any,1}:
Complex
v1.0.5
julia> Base.return_types(f3, Tuple{Complex})
1-element Array{Any,1}:
Complex{_1} where _1
Merging #48 into master will not change coverage. The diff coverage is
100.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #48 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 7 7
Lines 241 249 +8
=========================================
+ Hits 241 249 +8
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/interface.jl | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
src/types.jl | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
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 7184a18...19de5b5. Read the comment docs.
Decided to not support return type check for v1.0. Added a @warn
statement in the has_proper_return_type
function.
Implements #12.
The
InterfaceReview
struct has been enhanced to have an array ofmiss_reasons
for missing implementations. It's used to indicate whether a method is physically missing or just having an unmatched return type.As part of this PR, I have also split the tests into separate scripts.