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

Add problem matchers for RuboCop and minitest #61

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 9, 2020
Merged

Conversation

tido64
Copy link
Member

@tido64 tido64 commented Apr 9, 2020

No description provided.

@tido64 tido64 self-assigned this Apr 9, 2020
@tido64 tido64 force-pushed the tido/ruby-matchers branch 4 times, most recently from 32d5e51 to 39aad40 Compare April 9, 2020 17:39
@tido64 tido64 force-pushed the tido/ruby-matchers branch 3 times, most recently from 8d11bb9 to 1d76fb4 Compare April 9, 2020 17:51
{
"regexp": "^\\s*((?:Expected|Actual).*)$",
"message": 1,
"loop": true
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Due to a limitation in the format of problem matchers, it's currently not possible to extract multiline messages. For input such as:

TestTestApp#test_resources_pod_returns_spec_path [test/test_test_app.rb:31]:
Expected: ".."
  Actual: "."

"Expected: …" and "Actual: …" are two separate errors with this matcher. We are currently not able to match output such as:

TestTestApp#test_resources_pod_writes_podspec [test/test_test_app.rb:50]:
--- expected
+++ actual
@@ -1 +1 @@
-["dist/assetd", "dist/main.jsbundle"]
+["dist/assets", "dist/main.jsbundle"]

This issue has been reported in actions/toolkit#193 and actions/toolkit#319.

@tido64 tido64 marked this pull request as ready for review April 9, 2020 18:00
@tido64
Copy link
Member Author

tido64 commented Apr 9, 2020

Example output:
Screenshot 2020-04-09 at 20 03 14
Screenshot 2020-04-09 at 20 02 23
Screenshot 2020-04-09 at 20 01 55

@tido64 tido64 requested a review from arazabishov April 9, 2020 18:04
@arazabishov
Copy link
Member

Should we add a rule to require RuboCop / ESLint checks to pass before merging PRs?

@tido64
Copy link
Member Author

tido64 commented Apr 9, 2020

Should we add a rule to require RuboCop / ESLint checks to pass before merging PRs?

Yeah, I can make them required.

@tido64 tido64 merged commit 39a01bb into master Apr 9, 2020
@tido64 tido64 deleted the tido/ruby-matchers branch April 9, 2020 21:55
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.

2 participants