Move report base path handling to OutputReport #7234
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
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #7234 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 84.68% 84.66% -0.03%
- Complexity 3984 3992 +8
============================================
Files 578 578
Lines 12158 12168 +10
Branches 2499 2499
============================================
+ Hits 10296 10302 +6
- Misses 626 627 +1
- Partials 1236 1239 +3 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Merged
schalkms
approved these changes
Apr 27, 2024
BraisGabin
reviewed
Apr 27, 2024
| @@ -34,4 +34,8 @@ abstract class OutputReport : Extension { | |||
| * Defines the translation process of detekt's result into a string. | |||
| */ | |||
| abstract fun render(detektion: Detektion): String? | |||
|
|
|||
| companion object { | |||
| const val DETEKT_OUTPUT_REPORT_BASE_PATH_KEY = "detekt.output.report.base.path" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe what I'm talking about is for future PRs but I would like to know what do you think:
- Shouldn't we move this value to a proper property inside the context? Using this constant seems duck tape to avoid break the api. But with 2.0 we can avoid the duck tape.
- If we do that, should we make it nullable? I would vote for no. I think that we can always get good default values on our clients.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- I was in two minds about this. Some reports use absolute paths so I figured it could be better to make it available but not part of the API since it's not used for all reports. But on the other hand it's more convenient to make it part of the API. Could we keep this for a future PR? I don't want to get blocked.
- Agree that base path should not be nullable if it's added to the API as suggested. I've actually found a couple of places where it wasn't being passed through properly which came out in a PR I'm working on now so some of those gaps will be closed and we can make that change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we keep this for a future PR? I don't want to get blocked.
Sure! I'll open an issue :)
This was referenced Apr 28, 2024
BraisGabin
approved these changes
Apr 28, 2024
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.
Base path is only relevant for report output. This opens the next step of removing FilePath class and using absolute paths everywhere else.