Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

new checker 'encoded-compare' #179

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Oct 3, 2024
Merged

new checker 'encoded-compare' #179

merged 7 commits into from
Oct 3, 2024

Conversation

Antonboom
Copy link
Owner

Closes #72

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Sep 30, 2024

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11158525950

Details

  • 160 of 169 (94.67%) changed or added relevant lines in 7 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.2%) to 93.86%

Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
internal/checkers/encoded_compare.go 55 57 96.49%
internal/checkers/helpers_basic_type.go 13 15 86.67%
internal/checkers/helpers_encoded.go 15 17 88.24%
internal/checkers/helpers_format.go 23 26 88.46%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 11157907370: 0.2%
Covered Lines: 2446
Relevant Lines: 2606

💛 - Coveralls

@Antonboom
Copy link
Owner Author

@ccoVeille @mmorel-35

hi!

I try to find some time for a testifylint :)

This was a very painful checker, but I tried to simplify implementation as much as possible.
Please, test this branch on large project and send me feedback, can it be merged or not.

Thanks

@Antonboom Antonboom merged commit 8b28677 into master Oct 3, 2024
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

encoded-compare: suggest JSONEq/YAMLEq instead of Equal where appropriate
2 participants