Added more unit tests to ValidUrlParserTests to up coverage to 95%#36
Open
stho32 wants to merge 3 commits intohmol:developfrom
Open
Added more unit tests to ValidUrlParserTests to up coverage to 95%#36stho32 wants to merge 3 commits intohmol:developfrom
stho32 wants to merge 3 commits intohmol:developfrom
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Hello dear HMol,
i got to your project using up-for-grabs which saw a few issues one could help with.
I wrote a few unit tests for you to up your coverage on the ValidUrlParser from 86 to 95%.
I can't get to 100% coverage because I could not think of an url that passes the RegEx and Uri.TryCreate test and still fails at the other two tests for / and //.
Please feel free to review my work and tell me everything that I may correct.
I'd like to use that feedback then to push your coverage a little further, in a way that is benefitial to you.
E.g. I recognized that the way I name tests is different from yours. Is that ok for you? If not, what naming convention would you like me to use?
Thank you for your work and time,
stho32