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

test: use strictEqual in tests #149

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 25, 2018
Merged

test: use strictEqual in tests #149

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 25, 2018

Conversation

JustinBeckwith
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@ghost ghost assigned JustinBeckwith Jul 18, 2018
jkwlui
jkwlui previously requested changes Jul 18, 2018
Copy link
Member

@jkwlui jkwlui left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

fix strict equal checks

@jkwlui jkwlui assigned jkwlui and unassigned JustinBeckwith Jul 18, 2018
@JustinBeckwith
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kinwa91 lets try this again :)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 25, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #149 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master   #149   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files           4      4           
  Lines         709    709           
=====================================
  Hits          709    709

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c1defb3...ef4b35b. Read the comment docs.

@JustinBeckwith JustinBeckwith merged commit b71cc06 into master Jul 25, 2018
@stephenplusplus stephenplusplus deleted the strict branch July 31, 2018 15:59
Sign up for free to 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