Generics are not translated correctly
See original GitHub issueIt appear generics are not translated correctly in the coverage report. They contain the backtick which would be what it would be if you just did Type.Name
So for example Converter<T>
will incorrectly translate to Converter`1 in the report.
See this for an explanation
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17480990/get-name-of-generic-class-without-tilde
It would make reading the reports easier
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Comments:12 (7 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Incorrect var translation in class with generics : IDEA-326357
Incorrect var translation in class with generics. What steps will reproduce the issue? Enter this code in the editor:.
Read more >Why doesn't Java allow generic subclasses of Throwable?
What's wrong with generic exceptions? (As far as I know, generics are simply compile-time syntactic sugar, and they will be translated to Object ......
Read more >c# - How are generics implemented?
Not in .NET generics. The decision was made to exclude inheritance from type parameters, so it turns out that all instances of a...
Read more >Generic statements require little evidence for acceptance ...
Thus, acceptance of a generic sentence is doubly dissociated from the prevalence of the property it refers to—not only can true generics refer...
Read more >How To Use Generics in Go
In this way, generics provide a way to substitute a different type for the type parameters every time the generic type is used....
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
@danielpalme Thank you. 🙏 I presume if @MarcoRossignoli provides the original generic type names in the source with
>
<
your report will be fine with that too?