Exclude private protected members from BeEquivalentTo#2417
Exclude private protected members from BeEquivalentTo#2417jnyrup merged 2 commits intofluentassertions:developfrom
private protected members from BeEquivalentTo#2417Conversation
Qodana for .NETIt seems all right 👌 No new problems were found according to the checks applied 💡 Qodana analysis was run in the pull request mode: only the changed files were checked View the detailed Qodana reportTo be able to view the detailed Qodana report, you can either:
To get - name: 'Qodana Scan'
uses: JetBrains/qodana-action@v2023.2.8
with:
upload-result: trueContact Qodana teamContact us at qodana-support@jetbrains.com
|
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 6684304303
💛 - Coveralls |
|
Weird code coverage, isn't it? |
|
Yeah, saw the decrease but decided to close the computer for today and switch to watching conference talks on YouTube. |
I know that feeling. |
For properties and methods `PropertyInfoAssertions` and `MethodBaseAssertions` have assertions to exercise the `private`, `protected` and `private protected` cases in `GetCSharpAccessModifier(MethodBase)`. We don't have `FieldInfoAssertions` so we only exercise the access modifiers on fields through `WhichGetterHas`/`WhichSetterHas`. Since `GetFieldsFromHierarchy` excludes `private`, `protected` and `private protected` fields those three cases cannot currently be hit through the public API.
|
What I discovered when digging into the reduced code coverage. For properties and methods |
This fixes #2409
I guess this is what I meant with this comment
IMPORTANT
./build.sh --target spellcheckor.\build.ps1 --target spellcheckbefore pushing and check the good outcome