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. Weβll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Enhancement: Implement integer increment and decrement mutators #152
Enhancement: Implement integer increment and decrement mutators #152
Conversation
Build failure appears to be unrelated, see https://travis-ci.org/infection/infection/jobs/337077633#L632-L640. |
Thanks for creating this mutator. You are right, we didn't have it. To reduce the number of duplicated mutations, I suggest to not mutate Another approach is to remove What do you think guys? |
b11e689
to
3e7112f
Compare
@borNfreee Ha, nice! Yes, I was thinking that maybe one reason for this kind of mutator not to exist was that it might cause too many mutations. Great you like it, happy to hear suggestions! I will wait with modifications for now, then. |
3e7112f
to
9c1545c
Compare
Great addition! I would skip the 0 & 1 but adding a comment mentioning the literal number to explain why. For now as we neither have profiles or a way to alter a mutator configuration depending of which mutators are present (e.g. we could allow 0 & 1 here if |
9c1545c
to
0b99eac
Compare
@borNfreee @theofidry Build is failing as the minimum required MSI percentage has dropped below the configured 59%. Before
After
|
Just set it to This is something that bothers me a lot that we are decreasing it from PR to PR, but MSI is not that important as covered MSI as for me. |
6d5d312
to
b1a0199
Compare
Thank you @localheinz! |
Thank you, @borNfreee and @theofidry! |
This PR
IntegerIncrement
andIntegerDecrement
mutatorsπββοΈ Not sure if something similar already exists and I missed it, but oftentimes tests do not verify boundaries, so maybe this helps to avoid off-by-one errors.