-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
Started implementation of wrapping some Selenium JS commands #70
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #70 +/- ##
====================================
Coverage 0% 0%
====================================
Files 3 3
Lines 201 201
Branches 18 18
====================================
Misses 201 201 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Go ahead and change that access level and I think this will be ready to merge. I'm trying to resist the urge to build a map of "sauce:XYZ" strings that would help abstract the stuff that might change, but honestly I don't think it would make things better in this case.
import org.junit.Test; | ||
import static org.junit.Assert.*; | ||
|
||
|
||
public class SauceHelperTests { | ||
SauceHelper sauceHelper; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The Codacy check will pass if you make this private instead of package-protected (that's the access level when you leave it out)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yea, it might make sense to create that map. But I don't know how much extra benefit it will add over having each of the strings in a separate method. I guess if we move the map into it's own class, that will prevent SauceHelper.java from changing if we do need to update those strings. But also, feels a little like premature optimization to me as I've seen no proof that this data will change. Hence, I kept it simple until we have more information on the behavior of our system.
I will make that Codacy fix
No description provided.