Repository navigation
Conversation
Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-5-5
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Some CI test views read only JUnit XML (Harness reads JUnit XML or TRX),
so checkstyle output never shows up there.
JUnit has no concept of a lint finding. The formatter copies the mapping
rubocop --format junituses: one testcase per runner and changed file,testscounts files,failurescounts messages. This makes this a bit ofa "square-peg in a round hole" kind of thing which is similar to Rubocop's
own JUnit runner. It would be better for me to use
checkstyle! But alas...Two things:
(pronto-rubocop on a
.xmlfile). Runners filter files internally,and formatters can't see that filtering. RuboCop has the same gap one
level down:
rubocop --format junit a.rblistsBundler/GemFilenameas passing.
Runners#active_runnersis now public, so the formatter applies thesame
runners,skip_runners,max_warningsandexcluderulesinstead of copying them.
An optional runner hook (say
Runner#inspected_patches, defaulting toevery patch) would solve the phantom-pass thing but I felt that a smaller, more
reviewable change would be best for now. I'm happy to follow up if this sounds
like a reasonable thing to change.
I didn't see an AI assistance policy and it's understandably a hot topic right
now so in the interest of openness... I did generate the code using claude
code. I reviewed it carefully through a few iterations and tried to hew as
closely to project standards. Any mistakes are my own.