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

Comment out print statements #65

Closed

Conversation

Sillocan
Copy link
Contributor

@Sillocan Sillocan commented Aug 3, 2023

Description

Describe:

  • Print statements were left in which pollutes stdout for users. This breaks tests of users which use regex to find matching strings in stdout.

References

Fix #66

Checklist

  • Code lint checked via inv lint
  • Tests added

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 3, 2023

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@d48b79b). Click here to learn what that means.
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master      #65   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   94.17%           
=========================================
  Files             ?       12           
  Lines             ?      223           
  Branches          ?       48           
=========================================
  Hits              ?      210           
  Misses            ?       10           
  Partials          ?        3           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 94.17% <0.00%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@protoroto
Copy link
Member

@Sillocan Thanks for the pr :) for this to be merged, could you please:

  • remove the prints instead of commenting them
  • make a branch like bugfix/issue-66-remove-debug-print-statements and add a 66.bugfix file inside changes directory with Remove debug print statements as content, so that the CI will pass
    Thanks a lot, looking forward to merging this and releasing a new version

@Sillocan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sillocan commented Aug 4, 2023

@protoroto Do you want this branch made on your repo, or is via a fork OK? (I don't have permissions to create new branches 😄)

@Sillocan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sillocan commented Aug 4, 2023

Closing this one in favor of #67 with the correct branch name (can't change forks branch)

@Sillocan Sillocan closed this Aug 4, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Latest version causes lots of data to go to stdout
2 participants