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

add helper function for type error assertion #351

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Aug 1, 2024

Conversation

sbidari
Copy link
Collaborator

@sbidari sbidari commented Aug 1, 2024

closes #345

@sbidari sbidari linked an issue Aug 1, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 1, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.24%. Comparing base (d8e9f5d) to head (24c1594).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #351   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.23%   93.24%           
=======================================
  Files          39       39           
  Lines         917      918    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits          855      856    +1     
  Misses         62       62           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 93.24% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@sbidari sbidari marked this pull request as ready for review August 1, 2024 18:03
Copy link
Collaborator

@damonbayer damonbayer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks nice. We need tests for this function. We should use it on every function for input validation. Maybe not appropriate to do that all in a single PR.

@sbidari
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sbidari commented Aug 1, 2024

Looks nice. We need tests for this function. We should use it on every function for input validation. Maybe not appropriate to do that all in a single PR.

Opened new issues for this!

@damonbayer
Copy link
Collaborator

@sbidari I should have been more clear. We should add the tests in this PR, but we can roll out input validation more gradually.

@damonbayer damonbayer dismissed dylanhmorris’s stale review August 1, 2024 21:53

requests addressed

@damonbayer damonbayer merged commit 87a5960 into main Aug 1, 2024
9 checks passed
@damonbayer damonbayer deleted the 345-dryify-testing-of-validation-errors branch August 1, 2024 21:53
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.

DRYify testing of validation errors
3 participants