-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 393
Added fuel efficiency unit #703
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
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #703 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 58.34% 58.24% -0.11%
==========================================
Files 165 166 +1
Lines 37450 37757 +307
==========================================
+ Hits 21852 21992 +140
- Misses 15598 15765 +167
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@angularsen Hey, any suggestions on how to improve coverage on auto generated tests? Shall we lower the bar? |
Hi @aidbal, the codecov thing is quite new and I sure didn't add the new demands for 58.34% coverage so that must be something it's figured out on its own :-) You can disregard this. Test coverage is not your concern for the generated code part at least, but if you had added any custom code then tests should be added for that. I don't see any in this PR, so don't mind this for now. I'll try to get to reviewing this soon. |
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.
A few minor things, the rest looks good!
As for coverage, I think what you are seeing is that generated code for a new quantity is lower than the code coverage of the entire codebase. So when adding a new quantity, it automatically reduces the overall coverage percentage. I've started some small steps in improving coverage by moving test cases to the code generator so that we can properly test N quantities and M units instead of a handful picked ones. Things should improve then. |
No description provided.