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

Enhancement: Implement NoReturnByReferenceRule #912

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 17, 2025

Conversation

localheinz
Copy link
Member

This pull request

  • implements a NoReturnByReferenceRule

@localheinz localheinz self-assigned this Feb 17, 2025
@localheinz localheinz force-pushed the feature/no-return-by-reference branch from e08a5cf to 63f92ed Compare February 17, 2025 20:11
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 17, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 98.70%. Comparing base (4e42c4f) to head (e1f463e).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #912      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     98.63%   98.70%   +0.07%     
- Complexity      215      223       +8     
============================================
  Files            27       29       +2     
  Lines           803      847      +44     
============================================
+ Hits            792      836      +44     
  Misses           11       11              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@localheinz localheinz force-pushed the feature/no-return-by-reference branch from 63f92ed to e1f463e Compare February 17, 2025 20:12
@localheinz localheinz merged commit 0632928 into main Feb 17, 2025
25 checks passed
@localheinz localheinz deleted the feature/no-return-by-reference branch February 17, 2025 20:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants