ReturnCount.excludedFunctions should be a List<String> by gouri-panda · Pull Request #5081 · detekt/detekt

gouri-panda · 2022-07-15T18:37:30Z

closes: #5063

codecov · 2022-07-15T18:43:29Z

Codecov Report

Merging #5081 (caa95a9) into main (6bce28f) will increase coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 85.71%.

❗ Current head caa95a9 differs from pull request most recent head 1dc5b15. Consider uploading reports for the commit 1dc5b15 to get more accurate results

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #5081      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     84.87%   84.92%   +0.05%     
- Complexity     3575     3605      +30     
============================================
  Files           500      502       +2     
  Lines         11785    11876      +91     
  Branches       2197     2227      +30     
============================================
+ Hits          10002    10086      +84     
+ Misses          692      691       -1     
- Partials       1091     1099       +8

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...in/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/api/SplitPattern.kt	`92.59% <50.00%> (ø)`
...itlab/arturbosch/detekt/rules/style/ReturnCount.kt	`93.61% <100.00%> (+0.43%)`	⬆️
...io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/core/BindingContext.kt	`40.00% <0.00%> (-1.18%)`	⬇️
...lab/arturbosch/detekt/formatting/FormattingRule.kt	`97.87% <0.00%> (-0.09%)`	⬇️
.../arturbosch/detekt/formatting/wrappers/Wrapping.kt	`100.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...turbosch/detekt/formatting/wrappers/PackageName.kt	`100.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...rturbosch/detekt/rules/style/StyleGuideProvider.kt	`100.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...osch/detekt/formatting/wrappers/MultiLineIfElse.kt	`100.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...ch/detekt/formatting/wrappers/AnnotationSpacing.kt	`100.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...ch/detekt/formatting/wrappers/EnumEntryNameCase.kt	`100.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 18 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6bce28f...1dc5b15. Read the comment docs.

cortinico · 2022-07-16T09:50:14Z

verify-generated-config-file is broken. Could you re-run ./gradlew generateDocumentation?

BraisGabin · 2022-07-16T10:00:14Z

-    @Configuration("define a free-form comma separated list of function names to be ignored by this check")
-    private val excludedFunctions: SplitPattern by config("equals") { SplitPattern(it) }
+    @Configuration("define a list of function names to be ignored by this check")
+    private val excludedFunctions: List<String> by config(emptyList())


You are introducing a breaking change here. You should keep "equals".

And I don't know why the tests doesn't complain but looking at the code of SplitPattern this code doesn't do the same as before, right?

You are introducing a breaking change here. You should keep `"equals"

Ok

And I don't know why the tests doesn't complain but looking at the code of SplitPattern this code doesn't do the same as before, right?

Yes

@BraisGabin Should we change the SplitPattern implementation and leave the signature of ReturnCount as before i.e private val excludedFunctions: SplitPattern by config("equals") { SplitPattern(it) }?

Is this the right way to change?
ReturnCount.kt

private val excludedFunctions: SplitPattern by config(listOf("equals")) { SplitPattern(it.toString()) }

SplitPattern.kt

@Suppress("detekt.SpreadOperator") private val excludes = text .commaSeparatedPattern(*delimiters.toCharArray().map { it.toString() }.toTypedArray()) .mapIf(removeTrailingAsterisks) { seq -> seq.map { it.removePrefix("*") } .map { it.removeSuffix("*") } .map {it.removePrefix("[")} .map { it.removeSuffix("]") } } .toList()

I would look at what SplitPattern does and reproduce it in this rule. I'm sure that I did this time on other classes some time ago but for some reason I missed this one.

BraisGabin · 2022-07-18T14:16:59Z

@@ -1,14 +1,8 @@
+@file:Suppress("WildcardImport", "NoWildcardImports")


Don't use wildcard imports.

BraisGabin · 2022-07-18T14:19:28Z

-    @Configuration("define a free-form comma separated list of function names to be ignored by this check")
-    private val excludedFunctions: SplitPattern by config("equals") { SplitPattern(it) }
+    @Configuration("define a list of function names to be ignored by this check")
+    private val excludedFunctions: SplitPattern by config(listOf("equals")) { SplitPattern(it.toString()) }


If you want to go this way you can use it.joinString(",") (or something similar, I can't recall the signature). This way you don't need to change SplitPattern. That could have unexpected implications.

BraisGabin · 2022-07-18T15:21:34Z

+    fun matches(value: String): List<String> =
+        excludes.filter { value.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) }


Reduce the changed lines

Suggested change

fun matches(value: String): List<String> =

excludes.filter { value.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) }

fun matches(value: String): List<String> = excludes.filter { value.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) }

BraisGabin · 2022-07-18T15:21:51Z

+    fun contains(value: String?): Boolean =
+        excludes.any { value?.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) == true }


Reduce the changed lines

Suggested change

fun contains(value: String?): Boolean =

excludes.any { value?.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) == true }

fun contains(value: String?): Boolean = excludes.any { value?.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) == true }

BraisGabin · 2022-07-18T15:22:27Z

+        SplitPattern(
+            it.joinToString(
+                ","
+            )
+        )


Suggested change

SplitPattern(

it.joinToString(

","

)

)

SplitPattern(it.joinToString(","))

BraisGabin · 2022-07-18T15:23:03Z

+    private fun shouldBeIgnored(function: KtNamedFunction) =
+        excludedFunctions.contains(function.name)


Reduce the changed lines

Suggested change

private fun shouldBeIgnored(function: KtNamedFunction) =

excludedFunctions.contains(function.name)

private fun shouldBeIgnored(function: KtNamedFunction) = excludedFunctions.contains(function.name)

github-actions Bot added the rules label Jul 15, 2022

vercel Bot deployed to Preview July 15, 2022 18:42 View deployment

BraisGabin reviewed Jul 16, 2022

View reviewed changes

gouri-panda force-pushed the fix-5063 branch from b120709 to 6604084 Compare July 18, 2022 12:58

vercel Bot deployed to Preview July 18, 2022 13:05 View deployment

github-actions Bot added the api label Jul 18, 2022

github-advanced-security AI found potential problems Jul 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

Comment thread detekt-rules-style/src/main/kotlin/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/rules/style/ReturnCount.kt Fixed

gouri-panda force-pushed the fix-5063 branch from 6604084 to c3fef48 Compare July 18, 2022 13:35

vercel Bot deployed to Preview July 18, 2022 13:44 View deployment

BraisGabin reviewed Jul 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

gouri-panda force-pushed the fix-5063 branch from c3fef48 to caa95a9 Compare July 18, 2022 14:55

gouri-panda requested a review from BraisGabin July 18, 2022 14:56

vercel Bot deployed to Preview July 18, 2022 14:59 View deployment

BraisGabin approved these changes Jul 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

BraisGabin added this to the 1.22.0 milestone Jul 18, 2022

ReturnCount.excludedFunctions should be a List<String>

1dc5b15

gouri-panda force-pushed the fix-5063 branch from caa95a9 to 1dc5b15 Compare July 18, 2022 15:31

github-actions Bot removed the api label Jul 18, 2022

gouri-panda requested a review from BraisGabin July 18, 2022 15:32

vercel Bot deployed to Preview July 18, 2022 15:36 View deployment

BraisGabin approved these changes Jul 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

BraisGabin merged commit 13d823c into detekt:main Jul 23, 2022

VitalyVPinchuk pushed a commit to VitalyVPinchuk/detekt that referenced this pull request Jul 25, 2022

ReturnCount.excludedFunctions should be a List<String> (detekt#5081)

671b6a5

TWiStErRob mentioned this pull request Nov 30, 2022

ReturnCount JSON Schema is outdated #5588

Closed

		@@ -1,14 +1,8 @@
		@file:Suppress("WildcardImport", "NoWildcardImports")

		fun matches(value: String): List<String> =
		excludes.filter { value.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) }

		fun contains(value: String?): Boolean =
		excludes.any { value?.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) == true }

	fun contains(value: String?): Boolean =
	excludes.any { value?.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) == true }
	fun contains(value: String?): Boolean = excludes.any { value?.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) == true }

		private fun shouldBeIgnored(function: KtNamedFunction) =
		excludedFunctions.contains(function.name)

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

gouri-panda commented Jul 15, 2022

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jul 15, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

cortinico commented Jul 16, 2022

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

codecov Bot commented Jul 15, 2022 •

edited

Loading