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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Removing "No Operand in Assignment" Usage #120
Removing "No Operand in Assignment" Usage #120
Changes from 9 commits
f4aca07
39b9043
f4fc90e
32884a0
d182755
727460d
1d6bbd9
47c4376
b4d2eb1
1e6e9d0
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You'll probably be surprised why this was failing the tests: the actual function name in this file has been
getIntalledPackage
(note the typo, a missing "s" in "intalled") this whole time, since 2014 (atom/apm@c8d61000#diff-0aa64babcef87ba238fed061035f2fe14c587092a7339b55c5e4033c37370d70R46).(Regarding the singular
getIntalledPackage
, not to be confused with the pluralgetInstalledPackages
("Packages") which has/had no typo.)So, we can either revert the spelling here to the previous (typoed but defined) function name here, or rename the function elsewhere in the file that this line calls, so as to not have a typo in its name, lol.
But yeah, this broke tests by fixing a typo, I honestly did not see that coming.
Thanks again for working on this! Nice to see readability improvements to the code!!!!!! We sure need it, as debugging this PR has helped prove, IMO!!! Thank you!