Improve AbstractMatcherTestChecker
#599
Merged
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
|
Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes. |
|
Hey @mlrprananta, would you be okay with continuing on #527 as @Stephan202 suggests on top of this PR? 😄 |
These changes enable testing of a wider range of `Matcher` implementations. In a nutshell: - The `Matcher` under test is now passed `VisitorState` instances with an accurate `TreePath`. - The `Matcher` under test is no longer consulted for method select and cast type expressions, mirroring Refaster behavior.
rickie
force-pushed
the
sschroevers/improve-AbstractMatcherTestChecker
branch
from
1d630d7 to
386fd74
Compare
|
Rebased. |
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
|
Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I extracted these changes from this branch, following the discussion in this thread. There are no tests for this test code. My proposal would be to finalize #527 on top of this PR as proof that it works. (Over time we'll introduce other
Matchers that will rely on (and thus exercise) this code. IIRC I have one or more other branches that would benefit from these changes. I might try to open PRs for those.)Suggested commit message: