fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

fix: remove test coverage map - #4862

Merged
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map
May 7, 2022
Merged

fix: remove test coverage map#4862
wraithgar merged 1 commit into
latestfrom
gar/no-coverage-map

Conversation

@wraithgar

@wraithgarwraithgar commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.

This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.

While adding coverage to the npm search codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.

The npm view tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.

@wraithgar
wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code ownerMay 5, 2022 14:18
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from 2b9424a to 9be58d5CompareMay 5, 2022 14:26
@npm-robot

npm-robot commented May 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

no statistically significant performance changes detected

timing results
app-largecleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@869.138 ±12.8134.720 ±0.0319.634 ±0.2222.471 ±1.063.118 ±0.063.125 ±0.022.495 ±0.0412.810 ±0.032.399 ±0.023.557 ±0.10
#486257.388 ±6.3834.856 ±0.0123.270 ±4.7722.735 ±0.453.162 ±0.023.118 ±0.012.490 ±0.0112.883 ±0.042.490 ±0.033.613 ±0.01
app-mediumcleanlock-onlycache-onlycache-only
peer-deps
modules-onlyno-lockno-cacheno-modulesno-cleanno-clean
audit
npm@840.457 ±1.9026.701 ±0.0014.346 ±0.0815.198 ±0.122.885 ±0.062.845 ±0.012.531 ±0.029.124 ±0.062.323 ±0.003.330 ±0.15
#486241.998 ±0.2626.635 ±0.2214.447 ±0.1515.424 ±0.282.904 ±0.032.888 ±0.022.578 ±0.019.344 ±0.022.354 ±0.033.269 ±0.04

@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch 3 times, most recently from 3b70063 to f11fd1bCompareMay 5, 2022 20:16
Comment threadtest/coverage-map.js
return []
}

module.exports = coverageMap

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sweet

@ruyadornoruyadorno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

Turns out there were three files that still had no test coverage because
of the combination of the mocks in tests and the coverage map. Removing
the map altogether exposed them.
This PR removes the coverage map and fixes test to cover all lines that
were being missed.
While adding coverage to the `npm search` codebase multiple unneeded
guards and at least one bug was found (it was impossible to exclude
searches based on username). These were fixed.
The `npm view` tests were also refactored to use the real npm object.
Finally, a small inlining of lib/utils/file-exists.js was done.
@wraithgar
wraithgarforce-pushed the gar/no-coverage-map branch from f11fd1b to eae9637CompareMay 5, 2022 20:42
@wraithgarwraithgar changed the title fix: remote test coverage mapfix: remove test coverage mapMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar merged commit 48d2db6 into latestMay 7, 2022
@wraithgar
wraithgar deleted the gar/no-coverage-map branch May 7, 2022 16:11
maricarlagumbay1 added a commit to maricarlagumbay1/cli that referenced this pull request May 8, 2022
@wraithgarwraithgar mentioned this pull request May 11, 2022
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@wraithgar@npm-robot@ruyadorno