-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 166
Comments
Conversation
c3499c2 to
a1df1d1
Compare
a1df1d1 to
c818948
Compare
Codecov Report
Attention: Patch coverage is 97.22222% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.
Project coverage is 93.50%. Comparing base (
f89284f) to head (c818948).
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #705 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 93.49% 93.50% ======================================= Files 25 25 Lines 3861 3865 +4 Branches 396 396 ======================================= + Hits 3610 3614 +4 Misses 139 139 Partials 112 112
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Update comment above
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why is this removed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wasn't able to translate the check easily and also not sure if this check isn't to heavy to be included in the bindings (unless this helps Rust translation somehow).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe TODO is worth to leave? It seems to point to something that is not yet implemented in bindings, but might be useful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think the check for instance/msg null should be removed. This is the place it ensures it won't be null.
No description provided.