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

Swap expected and got fields #1282

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 8, 2023
Merged

Swap expected and got fields #1282

merged 1 commit into from
May 8, 2023

Conversation

JacobOaks
Copy link
Contributor

This is just a small nit from #1281 - I think the expected and got fields of the test case structs are flipped.

Copy link
Contributor

@rabbbit rabbbit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do we actually have a recommendation somewhere on ordering the fields within the tests struct?

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 8, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #1282 (f51a735) into master (24b7977) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1282   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.08%   98.08%           
=======================================
  Files          50       50           
  Lines        3242     3242           
=======================================
  Hits         3180     3180           
  Misses         53       53           
  Partials        9        9           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

Copy link
Contributor

@sywhang sywhang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @JacobOaks .

@rabbbit we don't - this fix has to do with the ordering of parameters passed to assert.Equal in line 58.

@sywhang sywhang merged commit 382e251 into uber-go:master May 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants