Skip to content

fix(lint): nolint modernize on backward loop in it.Reverse#895

Merged
samber merged 3 commits into
samber:masterfrom
headless-samber:fix/linter-modernize-nolint
May 23, 2026
Merged

fix(lint): nolint modernize on backward loop in it.Reverse#895
samber merged 3 commits into
samber:masterfrom
headless-samber:fix/linter-modernize-nolint

Conversation

@headless-samber
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The modernize linter (golangci-lint v2.12+) flags the backward loop in it.Reverse as replaceable with slices.Backward.

However, slices.Backward was introduced in Go 1.24, and lo supports Go 1.18+. This adds a targeted nolint directive with an explanation.

@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented May 23, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.60%. Comparing base (f389230) to head (59257f3).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #895   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.60%   92.60%           
=======================================
  Files          32       32           
  Lines        5082     5082           
=======================================
  Hits         4706     4706           
  Misses        273      273           
  Partials      103      103           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 92.60% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Also add cross-references from Uniq and UniqBy similarHelpers.
@samber samber merged commit cafe8ec into samber:master May 23, 2026
17 of 19 checks passed
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.

2 participants