Increase test coverage of the following Rules

[dcorrea777]

• Base64
• Base
• Bsn
• Contains
• Executable
• FilterVar
• In
• Ip
• Isbn
• NoWhiteSpace
• Pesel
• Phone
• PolishIdCard
• PortugueseNif
• PublicDomainSuffix
• StartsWith
• Subset
• Version
• VideoUrl

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.41%. Comparing base (2ae1df1) to head (5084aae).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #1457      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     96.23%   97.41%   +1.17%     
  Complexity      923      923              
============================================
  Files           199      199              
  Lines          2125     2125              
============================================
+ Hits           2045     2070      +25     
+ Misses           80       55      -25     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[henriquemoody]

Happy to see you here, @dcorrea777!

I've made a few suggestions removing the ->evaluate(...). That's because when we keep it, it's not clear that the exception is throw on a constructor level, in fact, it gives the impression that the exception is throw in the evaluate() method.

[dcorrea777]

I was actually a bit unsure whether it was really necessary to call the evaluate method, but now it's clear to me. Thank for you reply @henriquemoody

[henriquemoody]

The only thing I would change in your merge request is the commit message. The short message says, "Increase test coverage of the following Rules," but when you see that in the commit list, that doesn't make much sense because the following rules are not in the short message. In this case, I would just say, "Increase code coverage for some rules"

[henriquemoody]

Merged by 719f12a

Thank you for contributing, @dcorrea777!! 🐼