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

JSpecify: skip checking when type is primitive #924

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 3, 2024

Conversation

msridhar
Copy link
Collaborator

@msridhar msridhar commented Mar 2, 2024

Previously, NullAway would crash for the given tests when in JSpecify mode.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 2, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.09%. Comparing base (28cc318) to head (ededa4e).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master     #924   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     87.09%   87.09%           
- Complexity     1990     1991    +1     
=========================================
  Files            77       77           
  Lines          6430     6430           
  Branches       1245     1245           
=========================================
  Hits           5600     5600           
  Misses          422      422           
  Partials        408      408           

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

@msridhar msridhar requested a review from yuxincs March 2, 2024 21:49
Copy link
Collaborator

@yuxincs yuxincs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice catch!

@msridhar msridhar merged commit a42b3a8 into uber:master Mar 3, 2024
12 checks passed
@msridhar msridhar deleted the jspecify-unboxing branch March 3, 2024 01:04
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.

2 participants