-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
chore: Remove unnecessary default arguments that affect coverage #3522
Conversation
|
All 389 screenshot tests passed for commit 81029e3 vs. |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3522 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.41% 98.41%
=======================================
Files 120 120
Lines 5033 5033
Branches 619 619
=======================================
Hits 4953 4953
Misses 80 80
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this 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.
|
I saw the %s go up on my end, I'll look at the absolute numbers... |
|
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. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
|
All 389 screenshot tests passed for commit b9c5abe vs. |
Coverage number changes are exactly as expected
…erial-components#3522) (cherry picked from commit 8c25ed5)
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, sinceObject.assigneffectively no-ops onundefinedsources anyway.