Skip to content
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

Broken link at EmptyFunctionBlock #5604

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 7, 2022
Merged

Conversation

SaumyaBhushan
Copy link
Contributor

@SaumyaBhushan SaumyaBhushan commented Dec 4, 2022

workerB
A similar PR may already be submitted!
Please search among the Pull requests before creating one.

Thanks for submitting a pull request! Please provide enough information so that others can review your pull request. Link to relevant issues if possible.

The documentation of EmptyFunctionBlock has a "broken link":

Set the [ignoreOverridden] parameter to...

Fixes #5601
For more information, see the CONTRIBUTING guide.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 4, 2022

Warnings
⚠️ This PR is approved with no milestone set. If merged, it won't appear in the Detekt release notes.
Messages
📖

Thank you very much for making our website better ❤️!

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against eff9e5d

Copy link
Member

@schalkms schalkms left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you!

@@ -77,9 +77,9 @@ Reports empty `for` loops. Empty blocks of code serve no purpose and should be r

Reports empty functions. Empty blocks of code serve no purpose and should be removed.
This rule will not report functions with the override modifier that have a comment as their only body contents
(e.g., a // no-op comment in an unused listener function).
(e.g., a `// no-op comment` in an unused listener function).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@cortinico Do we recommend to update versioned docs when updating the documentation? It seems to me that we should only the current version of the detekt doc and the versioned doc changes are only necessary for critical changes or notes

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For critical documentation bugs this should be a must but for this kind of issues I think it is a nice to have. It's not necessary but, if it's done, it should be more than welcome.

@@ -77,9 +77,9 @@ Reports empty `for` loops. Empty blocks of code serve no purpose and should be r

Reports empty functions. Empty blocks of code serve no purpose and should be removed.
This rule will not report functions with the override modifier that have a comment as their only body contents
(e.g., a // no-op comment in an unused listener function).
(e.g., a `// no-op comment` in an unused listener function).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For critical documentation bugs this should be a must but for this kind of issues I think it is a nice to have. It's not necessary but, if it's done, it should be more than welcome.

Co-authored-by: Brais Gabín <braisgabin@gmail.com>
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 5, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #5604 (eff9e5d) into main (8aa1c82) will increase coverage by 85.89%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5604       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage        0   85.89%   +85.89%     
- Complexity      0     3637     +3637     
===========================================
  Files           0      516      +516     
  Lines           0    12179    +12179     
  Branches        0     2171     +2171     
===========================================
+ Hits            0    10461    +10461     
- Misses          0      628      +628     
- Partials        0     1090     +1090     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...rturbosch/detekt/rules/empty/EmptyFunctionBlock.kt 93.75% <ø> (ø)
...tting/wrappers/BlockCommentInitialStarAlignment.kt 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...detekt/metrics/processors/PackageCountProcessor.kt 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ekt/rules/bugs/UnconditionalJumpStatementInLoop.kt 95.45% <0.00%> (ø)
...t/rules/bugs/MapGetWithNotNullAssertionOperator.kt 81.25% <0.00%> (ø)
...etekt/core/config/validation/ValidationSettings.kt 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...turbosch/detekt/rules/style/ForbiddenMethodCall.kt 93.61% <0.00%> (ø)
...eptions/ThrowingExceptionsWithoutMessageOrCause.kt 88.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...urbosch/detekt/generator/collection/RuleSetPage.kt 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rturbosch/detekt/rules/bugs/UnnecessarySafeCall.kt 90.90% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 507 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@chao2zhang chao2zhang merged commit 457f534 into detekt:main Dec 7, 2022
@chao2zhang chao2zhang added this to the 1.23.0 milestone Dec 7, 2022
@SaumyaBhushan SaumyaBhushan deleted the Issue#5601 branch December 7, 2022 04:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Broken link at EmptyFunctionBlock
4 participants