Conversation
Brought coverage from 90% to 95.7%
all the primitives.
AlexanderSaydakov
approved these changes
Feb 3, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In examining the test coverage I discovered some large gaps in coverage in the same classes where the @pawel-wiejacha bug was found. I refactored the tests again for more comprehensive coverage. This brought the coverage from 90% to 95.7%. And for the target native and non-native buffer & memory leaf classes the coverage is 100%.
The actual test code has changed a great deal, which may make it difficult to review in this GitHub context.