Exclude public wrappers from coverage #1397
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
3vilhamster
requested review from
Groxx,
demirkayaender,
dkrotx,
jakobht,
shijiesheng and
taylanisikdemir
as code owners
sankari165
approved these changes
Nov 8, 2024
3vilhamster
force-pushed
the
exclude-public-wrappers
branch
from
b991a57 to
4df4aaa
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted filesContinue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
mrombout
pushed a commit
to softsense/cadence-client
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2025
* Exclude public wrappers
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed?
Excluding public wrappers from coverage.
Why?
Cadence-client provides a set of public callable methods, wrappers around actual implementations in the internal folder.
These wrappers are safe to exclude from coverage since they have no logic to test.
How did you test it?
Potential risks