Conversation
Merging this branch will decrease overall coverage
Coverage by fileChanged files (no unit tests)
Please note that the "Total", "Covered", and "Missed" counts above refer to code statements instead of lines of code. The value in brackets refers to the test coverage of that file in the old version of the code. |
| } | ||
| fields := strings.SplitN(string(bytes), ":", 2) | ||
| if len(fields) != 2 { | ||
| userName, password, ok := strings.Cut(string(usernamePassword), ":") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Previously, we would reject xxx:xxx:xxx, now we would just parse it as useName=xxx, password=xxx:xxx. Technically, that's a difference - is that okay for us?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, this is indeed an equal rewrite. strings.SplitN(input, 2) splits input = "aa:bb:cc" into output = ["aa", "bb:cc"]. The only possible output slice lengths are 1 and 2. You're thinking of just strings.Split(input).
| } | ||
| fields := strings.SplitN(string(bytes), ":", 2) | ||
| if len(fields) != 2 { | ||
| userName, password, ok := strings.Cut(string(usernamePassword), ":") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, this is indeed an equal rewrite. strings.SplitN(input, 2) splits input = "aa:bb:cc" into output = ["aa", "bb:cc"]. The only possible output slice lengths are 1 and 2. You're thinking of just strings.Split(input).
4 participants
No description provided.