-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
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
added better test code coverage for did peer #237
Conversation
@decentralgabe sorry for taking so long on this. Just haven't had a lot of cycles to spare lately. I'll see about adding even more tests in a future PR. For now, this should help a little with code coverage re: did peer |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #237 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 58.10% 59.23% +1.13%
==========================================
Files 35 35
Lines 4143 4155 +12
==========================================
+ Hits 2407 2461 +54
+ Misses 1333 1296 -37
+ Partials 403 398 -5
|
thanks for taking the time to add these @andorsk ! |
d, ok := did.(DIDPeer) | ||
if !ok { | ||
return nil, errors.Wrap(util.CastingError, "did:peer") | ||
} | ||
|
||
// The '=' at the end is an artifact of the encoding, and will mess up the decoding |
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.
did you mean to comment this out?
@andorsk this didn't get merged into main, did it? did you intend to close it |
oh. sorry. my mistake. misread the merge as it was going into main. I'll reopen it. Thanks. Sorry about that. |
adding more test coverage to did peer. #209