Skip to content

Commit ed11a32

Browse files
committed
C#: Update integration test expected output.
1 parent 827ea4c commit ed11a32

File tree

1 file changed

+4
-4
lines changed

1 file changed

+4
-4
lines changed
Lines changed: 4 additions & 4 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
11
diagnosticAttributes
2-
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25. Percentage of expressions with known type: 58. Both of these metrics should ideally be above 85. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | visibilityCliSummaryTable | true |
3-
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25. Percentage of expressions with known type: 58. Both of these metrics should ideally be above 85. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | visibilityStatusPage | true |
4-
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25. Percentage of expressions with known type: 58. Both of these metrics should ideally be above 85. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | visibilityTelemetry | true |
2+
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25 % (threshold 85 %). Percentage of expressions with known type: 58 % (threshold 85 %). Ideally these metrics should be above their thresholds. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | visibilityCliSummaryTable | true |
3+
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25 % (threshold 85 %). Percentage of expressions with known type: 58 % (threshold 85 %). Ideally these metrics should be above their thresholds. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | visibilityStatusPage | true |
4+
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25 % (threshold 85 %). Percentage of expressions with known type: 58 % (threshold 85 %). Ideally these metrics should be above their thresholds. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | visibilityTelemetry | true |
55
#select
6-
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25. Percentage of expressions with known type: 58. Both of these metrics should ideally be above 85. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25. Percentage of expressions with known type: 58. Both of these metrics should ideally be above 85. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | 1 |
6+
| Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25 % (threshold 85 %). Percentage of expressions with known type: 58 % (threshold 85 %). Ideally these metrics should be above their thresholds. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | Scanning C# code completed successfully, but the scan encountered issues. This may be caused by problems identifying dependencies or use of generated source code. Some metrics of the database quality are: Percentage of calls with call target: 25 % (threshold 85 %). Percentage of expressions with known type: 58 % (threshold 85 %). Ideally these metrics should be above their thresholds. Addressing these issues is advisable to avoid false-positives or missing results. If they cannot be addressed, consider scanning C# using either the `autobuild` or `manual` [build modes](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/codeql-code-scanning-for-compiled-languages#comparison-of-the-build-modes). | 1 |

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)