Skip to content

JS: sharpen recognition of match calls #6117

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 23, 2021

Conversation

asgerf
Copy link
Contributor

@asgerf asgerf commented Jun 21, 2021

Fixes #6067

Filters out match calls that are unlikely to call String.prototype.match based on how the result is used.

Evaluation looks ok

@asgerf asgerf added the JS label Jun 21, 2021
@asgerf asgerf requested a review from a team as a code owner June 21, 2021 09:51
esbena
esbena previously approved these changes Jun 21, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

⚠️ The head of this PR and the base branch were compared for differences in the framework coverage reports. The generated reports are available in the artifacts of this workflow run. The differences will be picked up by the nightly job after the PR gets merged. The following differences were found:

java

Generated file changes for java

  • Changes to framework-coverage-java.rst:
-    Java Standard Library,``java.*``,3,315,17,13,,,,,,4
+    Java Standard Library,``java.*``,3,317,17,13,,,,,,4
-    Totals,,84,1622,181,13,6,6,,33,1,58
+    Totals,,84,1624,181,13,6,6,,33,1,58
  • Changes to framework-coverage-java.csv:
- java.util,,,283,,,,,,,,,,,,,,15,268
+ java.util,,,285,,,,,,,,,,,,,,15,270

@asgerf
Copy link
Contributor Author

asgerf commented Jun 22, 2021

@tamasvajk we got a spurious diff report from the framework coverage action above ☝️. I believe it should compare against the first child of the merge commit rather than the latest SHA of target branch.

@codeql-ci codeql-ci merged commit 37b66f9 into github:main Jun 23, 2021
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.

False positive - caches.match
3 participants