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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fix issue 39: Confusing diff when comparing distinct types with the ame name #44

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jul 11, 2020
Merged

Fix issue 39: Confusing diff when comparing distinct types with the ame name #44

merged 3 commits into from Jul 11, 2020

Conversation

daniel-nichter
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-2.05%) to 97.945% when pulling 14bb6ec on dn/fix-issue-39 into ce1ba2d on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jul 11, 2020 •
edited

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling e4c73a6 on dn/fix-issue-39 into ce1ba2d on master.

@daniel-nichter daniel-nichter changed the title Fix #39: Confusing diff when comparing distinct types with the ame name Fix issue 39: Confusing diff when comparing distinct types with the ame name Jul 11, 2020
@daniel-nichter daniel-nichter force-pushed the dn/fix-issue-39 branch 2 times, most recently from b440f64 to 52815e0 Compare July 11, 2020 21:52
@daniel-nichter daniel-nichter merged commit 58784e6 into master Jul 11, 2020
@daniel-nichter daniel-nichter deleted the dn/fix-issue-39 branch July 11, 2020 21:59
@daniel-nichter daniel-nichter mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2020
Closed
@dependabot dependabot bot mentioned this pull request Mar 15, 2021
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@daniel-nichter @coveralls