-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
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
Redundant_catch refactored #577
Conversation
@acheshkov @lyriccoder I have finished the task, so please take additional look and merge if it is ok. |
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.
change test case and fix code
@@ -104,4 +104,4 @@ def test_fake_try_in_lambda(self): | |||
""" | |||
pattern = RedundantCatch() | |||
lines = pattern.value(os.path.dirname(os.path.realpath(__file__)) + '/Cache.java') | |||
self.assertEqual(lines, []) | |||
self.assertEqual(lines, [393]) |
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.
no, it's wrong behaviour. W have lambda. There is no another way to handle exception in lambda. There was a test to check that. If we have try in lambda, we should ignore it
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.
@lyriccoder I FIXED IT!
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.
ok
@rultor merge |
@rultor why not merging? |
@acheshkov OK, I'll try to merge now. You can check the progress of the merge here |
@acheshkov Done! FYI, the full log is here (took me 30min) |
Solved in case of #528
Also test was change because of previous error (you can check the sourse code and make sure that this code structure should be detected too