Skip to content

Conversation

IT-VBFK
Copy link
Contributor

@IT-VBFK IT-VBFK commented Oct 22, 2023

Fixes #2400

IMPORTANT

  • If the PR touches the public API, the changes have been approved in a separate issue with the "api-approved" label.
  • The code complies with the Coding Guidelines for C#.
  • The changes are covered by unit tests which follow the Arrange-Act-Assert syntax and the naming conventions such as is used in these tests.
  • If the PR adds a feature or fixes a bug, please update the release notes with a functional description that explains what the change means to consumers of this library, which are published on the website.
  • If the PR changes the public API the changes needs to be included by running AcceptApiChanges.ps1 or AcceptApiChanges.sh.
  • If the PR affects the documentation, please include your changes in this pull request so the documentation will appear on the website.
    • Please also run ./build.sh --target spellcheck or .\build.ps1 --target spellcheck before pushing and check the good outcome

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 22, 2023

Qodana for .NET

It seems all right 👌

No new problems were found according to the checks applied

💡 Qodana analysis was run in the pull request mode: only the changed files were checked

View the detailed Qodana report

To be able to view the detailed Qodana report, you can either:

  1. Register at Qodana Cloud and configure the action
  2. Use GitHub Code Scanning with Qodana
  3. Host Qodana report at GitHub Pages
  4. Inspect and use qodana.sarif.json (see the Qodana SARIF format for details)

To get *.log files or any other Qodana artifacts, run the action with upload-result option set to true,
so that the action will upload the files as the job artifacts:

      - name: 'Qodana Scan'
        uses: JetBrains/[email protected]
        with:
          upload-result: true
Contact Qodana team

Contact us at [email protected]

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Oct 22, 2023

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 6631791993

  • 47 of 47 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.003%) to 97.429%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 6615847009: 0.003%
Covered Lines: 11676
Relevant Lines: 11863

💛 - Coveralls

@IT-VBFK IT-VBFK changed the title Guard methods against assertion scope Guard methods against assertion scope [Not]HaveExplicit(Property|Method) Oct 22, 2023
@IT-VBFK IT-VBFK force-pushed the fix/guard-methods-against-assertion-scope branch 2 times, most recently from fdbd83e to 6219afc Compare October 23, 2023 04:18
@IT-VBFK IT-VBFK force-pushed the fix/guard-methods-against-assertion-scope branch from 6219afc to 1c0b81d Compare October 24, 2023 16:20
@IT-VBFK IT-VBFK force-pushed the fix/guard-methods-against-assertion-scope branch from 1c0b81d to bd7395c Compare October 24, 2023 19:45
@IT-VBFK IT-VBFK requested a review from dennisdoomen October 25, 2023 16:12
@dennisdoomen dennisdoomen merged commit d881fdd into fluentassertions:develop Oct 25, 2023
@IT-VBFK IT-VBFK deleted the fix/guard-methods-against-assertion-scope branch October 26, 2023 06:52
@IT-VBFK
Copy link
Contributor Author

IT-VBFK commented Oct 27, 2023

Label bug? 😉

@jnyrup jnyrup added the bug label Oct 27, 2023
jnyrup pushed a commit to jnyrup/fluentassertions that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2024
…hod)` (fluentassertions#2403)

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitProperty`

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitMethod`

* Add release notes
jnyrup pushed a commit to jnyrup/fluentassertions that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2024
…hod)` (fluentassertions#2403)

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitProperty`

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitMethod`

* Add release notes
jnyrup pushed a commit to jnyrup/fluentassertions that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2024
…hod)` (fluentassertions#2403)

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitProperty`

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitMethod`

* Add release notes
jnyrup pushed a commit to jnyrup/fluentassertions that referenced this pull request Aug 18, 2024
…hod)` (fluentassertions#2403)

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitProperty`

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitMethod`

* Add release notes
jnyrup pushed a commit to jnyrup/fluentassertions that referenced this pull request Aug 18, 2024
…hod)` (fluentassertions#2403)

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitProperty`

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitMethod`

* Add release notes
jnyrup pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2024
…hod)` (#2403)

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitProperty`

* Guard against assertion scope: `[Not]HaveExplicitMethod`

* Add release notes
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Methods are not guarded against being wrapped in an AssertionScope
4 participants