Test that Vector's traverse short-circuits #2092
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
This adds a test case that the `traverse` implementation for `Vector` short-circuits the traversal when possible. This would have failed the build in typelevel#2091. See typelevel#1015 for when similar tests were added for similar structures.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2092 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 94.63% 94.63%
=======================================
Files 318 318
Lines 5391 5391
Branches 209 209
=======================================
Hits 5102 5102
Misses 289 289Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
kailuowang
approved these changes
Dec 10, 2017
johnynek
approved these changes
Dec 10, 2017
|
👍 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This adds a test case that the
traverseimplementation forVectorshort-circuits the traversal when possible. This would have failed the build
in #2091.
See #1015 for when similar tests were added for similar structures.