Added Annotate Provide Option to inject named values without relying on Out #656
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #656 +/- ##
=========================================
+ Coverage 95.58% 95.7% +0.12%
=========================================
Files 9 9
Lines 385 396 +11
=========================================
+ Hits 368 379 +11
Misses 12 12
Partials 5 5
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
abhinav
approved these changes
Nov 7, 2018
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow, thank you. This is excellent!
I left minor style nits but I see no issues besides that. Can I get another
pair of eyes, @akshayjshah @glibsm @mh-park?
glibsm
approved these changes
Nov 7, 2018
added 2 commits
November 8, 2018 09:05
|
All Done. |
|
Thanks, @srikrsna! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Picking off where #633 was left out for #610. I believe once this is implemented #653 can be reasoned about in a better way.
I've also tried to incorporate all code review comments from #633 and also added some documentation.