test(corpus): name the flag that exists

[michen00]

What changes, and why

tests/corpus.rs:150 justified splitting the count assertion from the output assertion by naming what "--check and --json consumers actually read."

There is no --check, in either implementation, and there never has been:

$ grep -rn "'--check'\|\"--check\"" src/ tests/   # excluding this comment
  (nothing)

Rust:   --help --files-from --write --json --fail-on-change --ignore-file --exclude
Python: --write --json --fail-on-change --files-from --ignore-file --exclude

The option the comment means is --fail-on-change, which reports without rewriting and has existed since the first commit. A reader taking the comment at face value goes looking for an option neither binary accepts — in the file whose whole subject is what the two implementations must agree about.

The Python counterpart at tests/test_corpus.py:86 makes the same argument without naming a flag at all ("a single combined assertion would let the first failure hide the second"), so either wording is consistent with it. Naming the real flag is the more useful of the two here, because the point being made is which consumers the reported counts reach.

Corpus

The corpus is the specification, and both implementations answer to it. Tick what applies.

• This changes no behavior the corpus specifies.
• This changes what gets joined, and a case in corpus/ pins the new behavior. The case was written first and failed first.
• The change makes the tool join more than it did. The section above says what it will not eat.

One comment in a test file.

Checks

• make check passes, or make test does and this touches no Rust.

This touches Rust, so make rust-lint (clippy at -D warnings) and make rust-test — 104 unit tests and the 4 corpus harness tests, all passing.

[qodo-code-review]

PR Summary by Qodo

Correct flag name in corpus test comment

📝 Documentation 🕐 Less than 5 minutes

AI Description

• Replaces the nonexistent --check reference with --fail-on-change.
• Clarifies which command consumers read reported corpus counts.

High-Level Assessment

The current approach is optimal: naming the actual --fail-on-change flag is more informative than using generic wording and avoids directing readers toward a nonexistent option.

Files changed (1) +1 / -1

Documentation (1) +1 / -1

corpus.rsCorrect the reporting flag named in a corpus test comment +1/-1

Correct the reporting flag named in a corpus test comment

• Replaces the nonexistent '--check' option with '--fail-on-change' when explaining which consumers depend on corpus counts. Runtime behavior and test assertions remain unchanged.

tests/corpus.rs

[qodo-code-review]

Code Review by Qodo

🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📎 Requirement gaps (0)

Great, no issues found!

Qodo reviewed your code and found no material issues that require review

Tip of the day

💡 Did you know, you can add REVIEW.md to your repo root and Qodo follows it on every PR

More tips ↗ | Customize Qodo ↗ | Qodo docs ↗

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 87.40%. Comparing base (9a8399f) to head (66bf92b).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #51   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.40%   87.40%           
=======================================
  Files           3        3           
  Lines         691      691           
=======================================
  Hits          604      604           
  Misses         87       87           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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.

[Copilot]

🟢 Approval recommended

The change is a verified documentation-only correction that improves accuracy without affecting behavior or test logic.

Pull request overview

This PR corrects a misleading Rust corpus test comment by naming the actual CLI flag (--fail-on-change) that corresponds to “reporting without rewriting,” aligning the test documentation with the real, cross-implementation CLI contract.

Changes:

• Replace a nonexistent flag reference (--check) with the existing --fail-on-change in tests/corpus.rs test commentary.

File summaries

File	Description
tests/corpus.rs	Updates an explanatory comment to reference the correct CLI flag consumed by reporting paths.

Review details

• Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
• Comments generated: 0
• Review effort level: Lite

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.