Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 13, 2025. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@kfranqueiro
Copy link
Contributor

@kfranqueiro kfranqueiro commented Sep 5, 2018

This solves the mystery in #3516 (comment).

All of our foundation constructors follow the pattern of calling super(Object.assign(MDCFooFoundation.defaultAdapter, adapter)), but two components in particular (three if you include the Dialog prototype) were also assigning an empty object as the default value, which caused coverage to decrease due to the default "branch" never being taken. The default assignment is not necessary, since Object.assign effectively no-ops on undefined sources anyway.

@mdc-web-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

All 389 screenshot tests passed for commit 81029e3 vs. master! 💯🎉

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 5, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #3522 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #3522   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.41%   98.41%           
=======================================
  Files         120      120           
  Lines        5033     5033           
  Branches      619      619           
=======================================
  Hits         4953     4953           
  Misses         80       80
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
packages/mdc-list/foundation.js 99.12% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
packages/mdc-line-ripple/foundation.js 100% <100%> (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 74bf144...b9c5abe. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@acdvorak acdvorak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, it looks like branch coverage decreased from 621 to 619.

@kfranqueiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

I saw the %s go up on my end, I'll look at the absolute numbers...

@kfranqueiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm not sure where you got your numbers...

Before: 95.35% Branches 1270/1332

After: 95.49% Branches 1270/1330

This is fully intended, since I removed two uncovered branches.

Copy link
Contributor

@williamernest williamernest left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@mdc-web-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

All 389 screenshot tests passed for commit b9c5abe vs. master! 💯🎉

@kfranqueiro kfranqueiro dismissed acdvorak’s stale review September 5, 2018 20:46

Coverage number changes are exactly as expected

@kfranqueiro kfranqueiro merged commit 8c25ed5 into master Sep 5, 2018
@kfranqueiro kfranqueiro deleted the chore/foundation-constructors branch September 5, 2018 20:47
adrianschmidt pushed a commit to Lundalogik/material-components-web that referenced this pull request Sep 25, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants