Skip to content

Increase test coverage for fs module #56

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Dec 19, 2018
Merged

Increase test coverage for fs module #56

merged 12 commits into from
Dec 19, 2018

Conversation

domianer
Copy link
Contributor

While writing the tests, also JSDoc of the implemented methods had to be adapted.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Dec 14, 2018 •
edited
Loading

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission, we really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

RandomByte
RandomByte reviewed Dec 14, 2018
View reviewed changes
@domianer domianer changed the title Increase test coverage for ReaderCollection Increase test coverage for fs module Dec 17, 2018
matz3
matz3 previously requested changes Dec 17, 2018
View reviewed changes
@domianer domianer force-pushed the readerCollectionTestCoverage branch from f6bb608 to 4b20307 Compare December 19, 2018 07:39
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+14.5%) to 73.197% when pulling 4b20307 on readerCollectionTestCoverage into cf89c46 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Dec 19, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+25.5%) to 84.261% when pulling d0c33b9 on readerCollectionTestCoverage into cf89c46 on master.

@RandomByte RandomByte mentioned this pull request Dec 19, 2018
Closed
9 tasks
matz3
matz3 requested changes Dec 19, 2018
View reviewed changes
@domianer domianer merged commit 989c935 into master Dec 19, 2018
@domianer domianer deleted the readerCollectionTestCoverage branch December 19, 2018 17:07
RandomByte added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 22, 2019
@RandomByte
[INTERNAL] Tests: Replace deprecated Buffer constructor calls
7029e55 
The Buffer constructor used in some of our recently added tests
(#56 is deprecated. One should
use Buffer.from(string) instead.

Details:
https://nodejs.org/en/docs/guides/buffer-constructor-deprecation/
@RandomByte RandomByte mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2019
Merged
RandomByte added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 28, 2019
@RandomByte
[INTERNAL] Tests: Replace deprecated Buffer constructor calls
68956fb 
The Buffer constructor used in some of our recently added tests
(#56 is deprecated. One should
use Buffer.from(string) instead.

Details:
https://nodejs.org/en/docs/guides/buffer-constructor-deprecation/
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2025
@RandomByte
[ui5-fs][INTERNAL] Tests: Replace deprecated Buffer constructor calls
b40ff6e 
The Buffer constructor used in some of our recently added tests
(SAP/ui5-fs#56 is deprecated. One should
use Buffer.from(string) instead.

Details:
https://nodejs.org/en/docs/guides/buffer-constructor-deprecation/
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2025
@RandomByte
[ui5-fs][ui5-fs][INTERNAL] Tests: Replace deprecated Buffer construct…
275850b 
…or calls

The Buffer constructor used in some of our recently added tests
(SAP/ui5-fs#56 is deprecated. One should
use Buffer.from(string) instead.

Details:
https://nodejs.org/en/docs/guides/buffer-constructor-deprecation/
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 25, 2025
@domianer
[fs] Increase test coverage for fs module (SAP/ui5-fs#56)
083e720 
* Increase test coverage for ReaderCollection, DuplexCollection, ReaderCollectionPrioritized, Resource, traceSummary, resourceFactory, AbstractReaderWriter, AbstractReader

* Apply Matthias' code review comments
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 25, 2025
@RandomByte
[fs][INTERNAL] Tests: Replace deprecated Buffer constructor calls
9010011 
The Buffer constructor used in some of our recently added tests
(SAP/ui5-fs#56 is deprecated. One should
use Buffer.from(string) instead.

Details:
https://nodejs.org/en/docs/guides/buffer-constructor-deprecation/
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2025
@domianer @d3xter666
[fs] Increase test coverage for fs module (SAP/ui5-fs#56)
70186ad 
* Increase test coverage for ReaderCollection, DuplexCollection, ReaderCollectionPrioritized, Resource, traceSummary, resourceFactory, AbstractReaderWriter, AbstractReader

* Apply Matthias' code review comments
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2025
@RandomByte @d3xter666
[fs][INTERNAL] Tests: Replace deprecated Buffer constructor calls
92a1db5 
The Buffer constructor used in some of our recently added tests
(SAP/ui5-fs#56 is deprecated. One should
use Buffer.from(string) instead.

Details:
https://nodejs.org/en/docs/guides/buffer-constructor-deprecation/
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2025
@domianer @d3xter666
[fs] Increase test coverage for fs module (SAP/ui5-fs#56)
f6c9fc0 
* Increase test coverage for ReaderCollection, DuplexCollection, ReaderCollectionPrioritized, Resource, traceSummary, resourceFactory, AbstractReaderWriter, AbstractReader

* Apply Matthias' code review comments
d3xter666 pushed a commit to UI5/cli that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2025
@RandomByte @d3xter666
[fs][INTERNAL] Tests: Replace deprecated Buffer constructor calls
c1b8d88 
The Buffer constructor used in some of our recently added tests
(SAP/ui5-fs#56 is deprecated. One should
use Buffer.from(string) instead.

Details:
https://nodejs.org/en/docs/guides/buffer-constructor-deprecation/
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@RandomByte RandomByte RandomByte left review comments

@matz3 matz3 matz3 approved these changes

@svbender svbender Awaiting requested review from svbender

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@domianer @CLAassistant @coveralls @matz3 @RandomByte