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

feat: tempclean Ruby #3943

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Apr 3, 2024
Merged

feat: tempclean Ruby #3943

merged 12 commits into from
Apr 3, 2024

Conversation

joydeep049
Copy link
Contributor

Tempclean script added to RubyFuzzer

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Mar 16, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 75.84%. Comparing base (d6cbe40) to head (e6b04c2).
Report is 114 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3943      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.41%   75.84%   +0.42%     
==========================================
  Files         808      820      +12     
  Lines       11983    12405     +422     
  Branches     1598     1680      +82     
==========================================
+ Hits         9037     9408     +371     
- Misses       2593     2644      +51     
  Partials      353      353              
Flag Coverage Δ
longtests 75.84% <ø> (+0.42%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@terriko terriko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might as well fix this one as well before merging.

fuzz/fuzz_gemfile_lock.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@joydeep049
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think its ready to merge now @terriko @anthonyharrison.

Signed-off-by: Joydeep Tripathy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Joydeep Tripathy <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

@terriko terriko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. I'm still wondering if we should maybe switch to the with syntax for these, but since there's no functional difference I think I'm going to err on the side of getting these merged and debating a refactor at another time.

Thanks for your patience, I know these have been sitting a while!

@terriko terriko merged commit e28a479 into intel:main Apr 3, 2024
23 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants