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
Issue #4934: Enforced WS in appropriate places for block javadoc tags #4938
Conversation
diffreport-JavadocParagraph The diffs are due to wrong javadoc which resulted in parse error and so the diffs should be acceptable |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4938 +/- ##
======================================
Coverage 100% 100%
======================================
Files 293 293
Lines 15889 15889
Branches 3603 3603
======================================
Hits 15889 15889 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
||
| EXCEPTION_LITERAL (WS | NEWLINE)* CLASS_NAME? (WS | NEWLINE)* description? | ||
| EXCEPTION_LITERAL (WS | NEWLINE)+ CLASS_NAME? (WS | NEWLINE)* ((WS | NEWLINE) description)? |
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.
(WS | NEWLINE)+
- will this work for /** @exception*/
? Please add such inputs in UTs for every tag
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.
5dcd9d8
to
8136bc7
Compare
I don't see any changes in code coverage in pom. Did the percentage stay the same and not increase? |
Sorry I missed your comment. The coverage had decreased as the grammar was modified. Therefore the coverage was restored instead of getting increased. We should have covered "almost" all new grammar code as all that was done was changing the way |
4b260b4
to
a8e62c7
Compare
@romani
Done. Added one more UT. UT is in |
@PS-SP please add such UTs for every affected tag |
Appveyor failure relates to #4980 and is due to cases like the following in an input file:
Removing these cases decreases the coverage. So coverage must decrease a bit for this PR. |
I had expected Please correct me if wrong but I have not been able to find any package for which the coverage decreased in cobertura reports, still the total line and total branch coverage decreased by 1 %. May be some rounding off might be involved here and there. Please have a look @Vladlis |
@PS-SP , please enforce |
edd0947
to
8496518
Compare
Done. |
@romani , all test cases are added, please review |
Issue #4934 : Enforced WS in appropriate places for block javadoc tags