Revert "Merge into master"#4
Merged
Mairramer merged 1 commit intoJan 7, 2026
Merged
Conversation
|
Note Gemini is unable to generate a review for this pull request due to the file types involved not being currently supported. |
Mairramer
merged commit 6af011c
into
feature/add-currentIndex-and-onItemChanged-to-carousel
1 check passed
Mairramer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 23, 2026
Fixes flutter#181196 This PR fixes the description for the bySemanticsLabel/Identifier matchers, which was missing. Note: The framework uses `byElementPredicate()` in a bunch of places in tests, but not all use the `description` field. Should we add descriptions to those? Example: ```dart import 'package:flutter/material.dart'; import 'package:flutter_test/flutter_test.dart'; void main() { testWidgets('bySemanticsLabel', (tester) async { await tester.pumpWidget(const MaterialApp(home: Text('hello'))); await tester.pumpAndSettle(); expect(find.bySemanticsLabel('goodbye'), findsOneWidget); }); testWidgets('bySemanticsLabel regex', (tester) async { await tester.pumpWidget(const MaterialApp(home: Text('hello'))); await tester.pumpAndSettle(); expect(find.bySemanticsLabel(RegExp('^foo')), findsOneWidget); }); testWidgets('bySemanticsIdentifier', (tester) async { await tester.pumpWidget(const MaterialApp(home: Text('hello'))); await tester.pumpAndSettle(); expect(find.bySemanticsIdentifier('goodbye'), findsOneWidget); }); testWidgets('bySemanticsIdentifier regex', (tester) async { await tester.pumpWidget(const MaterialApp(home: Text('hello'))); await tester.pumpAndSettle(); expect(find.bySemanticsIdentifier(RegExp('^foo')), findsOneWidget); }); } ``` now gives: ```dart ══╡ EXCEPTION CAUGHT BY FLUTTER TEST FRAMEWORK ╞════════════════════════════════════════════════════ The following TestFailure was thrown running a test: Expected: exactly one matching candidate Actual: _ElementPredicateWidgetFinder:<Found 0 widgets with a semantics label named "goodbye": []> Which: means none were found but one was expected When the exception was thrown, this was the stack: #4 main.<anonymous closure> (file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart:8:5) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#5 testWidgets.<anonymous closure>.<anonymous closure> (package:flutter_test/src/widget_tester.dart:192:15) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#6 TestWidgetsFlutterBinding._runTestBody (package:flutter_test/src/binding.dart:1692:5) <asynchronous suspension> <asynchronous suspension> (elided one frame from package:stack_trace) This was caught by the test expectation on the following line: file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart line 8 The test description was: bySemanticsLabel ════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ ══╡ EXCEPTION CAUGHT BY FLUTTER TEST FRAMEWORK ╞════════════════════════════════════════════════════ The following TestFailure was thrown running a test: Expected: exactly one matching candidate Actual: _ElementPredicateWidgetFinder:<Found 0 widgets with a semantics label matching the pattern "^foo": []> Which: means none were found but one was expected When the exception was thrown, this was the stack: #4 main.<anonymous closure> (file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart:14:5) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#5 testWidgets.<anonymous closure>.<anonymous closure> (package:flutter_test/src/widget_tester.dart:192:15) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#6 TestWidgetsFlutterBinding._runTestBody (package:flutter_test/src/binding.dart:1692:5) <asynchronous suspension> <asynchronous suspension> (elided one frame from package:stack_trace) This was caught by the test expectation on the following line: file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart line 14 The test description was: bySemanticsLabel regex ════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ ══╡ EXCEPTION CAUGHT BY FLUTTER TEST FRAMEWORK ╞════════════════════════════════════════════════════ The following TestFailure was thrown running a test: Expected: exactly one matching candidate Actual: _ElementPredicateWidgetFinder:<Found 0 widgets with a semantics identifier named "goodbye": []> Which: means none were found but one was expected When the exception was thrown, this was the stack: #4 main.<anonymous closure> (file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart:20:5) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#5 testWidgets.<anonymous closure>.<anonymous closure> (package:flutter_test/src/widget_tester.dart:192:15) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#6 TestWidgetsFlutterBinding._runTestBody (package:flutter_test/src/binding.dart:1692:5) <asynchronous suspension> <asynchronous suspension> (elided one frame from package:stack_trace) This was caught by the test expectation on the following line: file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart line 20 The test description was: bySemanticsIdentifier ════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ ══╡ EXCEPTION CAUGHT BY FLUTTER TEST FRAMEWORK ╞════════════════════════════════════════════════════ The following TestFailure was thrown running a test: Expected: exactly one matching candidate Actual: _ElementPredicateWidgetFinder:<Found 0 widgets with a semantics identifier matching the pattern "^foo": []> Which: means none were found but one was expected When the exception was thrown, this was the stack: #4 main.<anonymous closure> (file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart:26:5) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#5 testWidgets.<anonymous closure>.<anonymous closure> (package:flutter_test/src/widget_tester.dart:192:15) <asynchronous suspension> flutter#6 TestWidgetsFlutterBinding._runTestBody (package:flutter_test/src/binding.dart:1692:5) <asynchronous suspension> <asynchronous suspension> (elided one frame from package:stack_trace) This was caught by the test expectation on the following line: file:///Users/navaronbracke/Desktop/matchers_test/test/widget_test.dart line 26 The test description was: bySemanticsIdentifier regex ════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ ``` *If you had to change anything in the [flutter/tests] repo, include a link to the migration guide as per the [breaking change policy].* ## Pre-launch Checklist - [x] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs. - [x] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my responsibilities. - [x] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features we expect every widget to implement]. - [x] I signed the [CLA]. - [x] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above. - [x] I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with `///`). - [x] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is [test-exempt]. - [x] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven Fixes] where supported. - [ ] All existing and new tests are passing. If you need help, consider asking for advice on the #hackers-new channel on [Discord]. **Note**: The Flutter team is currently trialing the use of [Gemini Code Assist for GitHub](https://developers.google.com/gemini-code-assist/docs/review-github-code). Comments from the `gemini-code-assist` bot should not be taken as authoritative feedback from the Flutter team. If you find its comments useful you can update your code accordingly, but if you are unsure or disagree with the feedback, please feel free to wait for a Flutter team member's review for guidance on which automated comments should be addressed. <!-- Links --> [Contributor Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#overview [Tree Hygiene]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md [test-exempt]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#tests [Flutter Style Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md [Features we expect every widget to implement]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md#features-we-expect-every-widget-to-implement [CLA]: https://cla.developers.google.com/ [flutter/tests]: https://github.com/flutter/tests [breaking change policy]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#handling-breaking-changes [Discord]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Chat.md [Data Driven Fixes]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Data-driven-Fixes.md
Mairramer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 3, 2026
Instead of using fake touch events. Before this patch `FlutterViewController` sends two fake touch events (down and up), at `(0, 0)` to the framework to signal that the status bar is tapped on iOS. The scaffold widget and the cupertino page scaffold widget set up gesture detectors to listen for these fake taps, and scroll the "primary" scrollable container to the top in response. This messaging mechanism is sometimes ambiguous, as the framework may interpret that as a pair of regular pointer tap events (for instance in flutter#177992 the modal barrier claims the tap gesture and as a result the modal barrier is dismissed by the fake touch events). This PR changes that to communicate the status bar tap event via a new system channel, and dispatch the events via `WidgetsBindingObserver`s in the framework. See also flutter#177992 (comment) Fixes flutter#177992, fixes flutter#175606 It appears that UIKit also has access to the coordinates of the touch events to determine which scrollable view(s?) to dispatch the scroll to top event to. ```objc * frame #0: 0x00000001032f6520 UIPlayground.debug.dylib`MyScrollViewController.scrollViewShouldScrollToTop(scrollView=0x0000000106014800) at UIScrollView.swift:13:3 frame #2: 0x00000001867c9300 UIKitCore`-[UIScrollView _scrollToTopIfPossible:] + 316 frame #3: 0x00000001867c9604 UIKitCore`-[UIScrollView _scrollToTopFromTouchAtScreenLocation:resultHandler:] + 40 frame #4: 0x0000000186299bbc UIKitCore`__71-[UIWindow _scrollToTopViewsUnderScreenPointIfNecessary:resultHandler:]_block_invoke.358 + 168 frame flutter#5: 0x000000018629981c UIKitCore`-[UIWindow _scrollToTopViewsUnderScreenPointIfNecessary:resultHandler:] + 1212 frame flutter#6: 0x000000018581ed8c UIKitCore`-[UIStatusBarManager _handleScrollToTopAtXPosition:] + 192 frame flutter#7: 0x000000018581eb60 UIKitCore`-[UIStatusBarManager handleTapAction:] + 60 ``` Unfortunately that information is not available to user application. The iOS accessibility bridge currently does create dummy UIScrollViews for each scrollable in the accessibility tree so may be we can take advantage of that in the future. ## Pre-launch Checklist - [ ] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs. - [ ] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my responsibilities. - [ ] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features we expect every widget to implement]. - [ ] I signed the [CLA]. - [ ] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above. - [ ] I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with `///`). - [ ] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is [test-exempt]. - [ ] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven Fixes] where supported. - [ ] All existing and new tests are passing. If you need help, consider asking for advice on the #hackers-new channel on [Discord]. **Note**: The Flutter team is currently trialing the use of [Gemini Code Assist for GitHub](https://developers.google.com/gemini-code-assist/docs/review-github-code). Comments from the `gemini-code-assist` bot should not be taken as authoritative feedback from the Flutter team. If you find its comments useful you can update your code accordingly, but if you are unsure or disagree with the feedback, please feel free to wait for a Flutter team member's review for guidance on which automated comments should be addressed. <!-- Links --> [Contributor Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#overview [Tree Hygiene]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md [test-exempt]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#tests [Flutter Style Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md [Features we expect every widget to implement]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md#features-we-expect-every-widget-to-implement [CLA]: https://cla.developers.google.com/ [flutter/tests]: https://github.com/flutter/tests [breaking change policy]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#handling-breaking-changes [Discord]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Chat.md [Data Driven Fixes]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Data-driven-Fixes.md
Mairramer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2026
This patch: 1. Updates the `-mios-simulator-version-min` ldflag to `15.0` (this fixes the crash during test discovery). 2. refactors swiftc.py a bit, moves the target triplet logic from darwin/BUILD.gn to swiftc.py so you can override the ios version in a test target (but it's not absolutely necessary for this change since it's the linker flag that makes the difference). 3. Migrates a few xctest tests to swift testing tests. The names of the tests are kept as-is so the diff is easier to read. ### The Crash ``` (lldb) bt * thread flutter#9, name = '[Swift Testing] test discovery - loading test #0 (Task 3)', queue = 'com.apple.root.user-initiated-qos.cooperative', stop reason = EXC_BAD_ACCESS (code=1, address=0x0) * frame #0: 0x0000000000000000 frame #1: 0x000000010ad0fb80 libios_test_flutter.dylib`closure #1() in variable initialization expression of static AccessibilityFeaturesTests.$s22ios_test_flutter_swift26AccessibilityFeaturesTestsV43accessibilityFeatureFlagRawValuesAreCorrect4TestfMp_24accessorc8120add5c86a9e3fMu_ at @__swiftmacro_22ios_test_flutter_swift26AccessibilityFeaturesTestsV43accessibilityFeatureFlagRawValuesAreCorrect4TestfMp_.swift:0 frame #2: 0x000000010224a39c Testing`partial apply for closure #1 in __checkClosureCall(performing:throws:mismatchExplanation:expression:comments:isRequired:sourceLocation:) frame #3: 0x000000010224a39c Testing`partial apply for closure #1 in __checkClosureCall(performing:throws:mismatchExplanation:expression:comments:isRequired:sourceLocation:) frame #4: 0x00000001022d8de8 Testing`(1) await resume partial function for generic specialization <(Testing.Test, Testing.Runner.Plan.Action)> of reabstraction thunk helper <τ_0_0 where τ_0_0: Swift.Sendable> from @escaping @isolated(any) @callee_guaranteed @async () -> (@out τ_0_0) to @escaping @callee_guaranteed @async () -> (@out τ_0_0, @error @owned Swift.Error) frame flutter#5: 0x000000010224ae24 Testing`closure #1 in __checkClosureCall(throws:performing:expression:comments:isRequired:sourceLocation:) ``` Initially I thought swift testing doesn't support test discovery in linked dylibs but it's apparently not the case. And according to gemini it's not anything else in a binary but ``` Load command 9 cmd LC_BUILD_VERSION platform 7 - minos 14.0 + minos 15.6 sdk 26.4 ``` As it tried to use `15.6` in `swift_flags` and put `14.0` in `ldflags` and hit the same crash. This is what gemini has to say: > This is the definitive end of the road! 🔬 > > I have mathematically eliminated every other variable in computing existence. Between a binary that crashes and a binary that runs, literally NOTHING changed except that single number. Also it thinks it's because of this in `dyld`: > Look at the code in dyldMain.cpp at Line 430: > > cpp > // dyldMain.cpp Line 430 > // TODO: Remove once drop support for simulators older than iOS 17, tvOS 15, and watchOS 8 > mach_o::PlatformAndVersions pvs = dyldSimHdr->platformAndVersions(); > mach_o::Policy policy(mach_o::Architecture(), pvs, 0); > // [!!] THE SMOKING GUN [!!] > // Old simulators add the main executable to all_image_info in the simulator process, not in the host > if ( policy.enforceImageListRemoveMainExecutable() ) { > STACK_ALLOC_ARRAY(const mach_header*, mhs, 1); > mhs.push_back(state.config.process.mainExecutableMF); > std::span<const mach_header*> mhSpan(&mhs[0], 1); > > // LITERALLY REMOVES THE IMAGE FROM THE TRACKING TABLE!! > state.externallyViewable->removeImages(state.persistentAllocator, ephemeralAllocator, mhSpan); > } > Why this triggers your exact crash: > The Condition: policy.enforceImageListRemoveMainExecutable() explicitly returns true for all binaries linked below a specific epoch (iOS 15/16). > The Destructive Action: Because dyld thinks it needs to work around an ancient Simulator bug, it explicitly calls removeImages, ripping your binary's tracking data directly out of the global tracking table (all_image_info). > The Crash: Modern Swift Testing and the Swift Runtime rely on scanning all_image_info to discover where the @test sections are in memory! > The Final Blow: Because dyld just destructively hid the image from the tracking table, the Swift Runtime couldn't look it up, failed to resolve the internal metadata pointers, and instantly crashed in swift_getTypeByMangledName. > By simply lying and writing minos 15.0 into the header, you caused policy.enforceImageListRemoveMainExecutable() to return false, totally disabling this destructive legacy workaround and leaving your image intact for Swift to find! 🔬🏆🏁 ## Pre-launch Checklist - [ ] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs. - [ ] I read the [AI contribution guidelines] and understand my responsibilities, or I am not using AI tools. - [ ] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my responsibilities. - [ ] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features we expect every widget to implement]. - [ ] I signed the [CLA]. - [ ] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above. - [ ] I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with `///`). - [ ] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is [test-exempt]. - [ ] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven Fixes] where supported. - [ ] All existing and new tests are passing. If you need help, consider asking for advice on the #hackers-new channel on [Discord]. If this change needs to override an active code freeze, provide a comment explaining why. The code freeze workflow can be overridden by code reviewers. See pinned issues for any active code freezes with guidance. **Note**: The Flutter team is currently trialing the use of [Gemini Code Assist for GitHub](https://developers.google.com/gemini-code-assist/docs/review-github-code). Comments from the `gemini-code-assist` bot should not be taken as authoritative feedback from the Flutter team. If you find its comments useful you can update your code accordingly, but if you are unsure or disagree with the feedback, please feel free to wait for a Flutter team member's review for guidance on which automated comments should be addressed. <!-- Links --> [Contributor Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#overview [AI contribution guidelines]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#ai-contribution-guidelines [Tree Hygiene]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md [test-exempt]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#tests [Flutter Style Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md [Features we expect every widget to implement]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md#features-we-expect-every-widget-to-implement [CLA]: https://cla.developers.google.com/ [flutter/tests]: https://github.com/flutter/tests [breaking change policy]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#handling-breaking-changes [Discord]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Chat.md [Data Driven Fixes]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Data-driven-Fixes.md
Mairramer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2026
…rent (e.g. Table) (flutter#185793) ## Issue Fixes flutter#174133 (and the duplicate flutter#180337). Placing a widget that hosts an `OverlayPortal` — most visibly `Slider`, but anything that calls `OverlayPortalController.show()` before its `OverlayPortal` is mounted — inside a `Table`/`TableRow` crashes during mount with: ``` 'package:flutter/src/rendering/object.dart': Failed assertion: line 2138 pos 12: 'child.owner == owner': is not true. #2 RenderObject.redepthChild #3 _RenderDeferredLayoutBox.redepthChildren overlay.dart:2576 #4 RenderObject.redepthChild flutter#5 RenderObject.adoptChild flutter#6 _RenderTheater._addDeferredChild overlay.dart:1312 flutter#7 _OverlayEntryLocation._addChild overlay.dart:2185 flutter#8 _OverlayPortalElement.insertRenderObjectChild overlay.dart:2447 ... flutter#24 _TableElement.mount.<anonymous closure>... table.dart:303 ``` This is a regression introduced between Flutter 3.32 and 3.35. ## Root cause `Table` defers calling `adoptChild` on its `RenderObject` children until *every* row has been mounted (`_TableElement.insertRenderObjectChild` is a no-op while `_doingMountOrUpdate`; the children are wired in later by `_updateRenderObjectChildren`). Meanwhile `_OverlayPortalElement.mount` runs `super.mount` (which "attaches" the layout surrogate to its parent — but Table swallows it) and then immediately mounts the overlay child, which causes the deferred-layout box to be adopted by the `_RenderTheater`. The theater is attached, so the deferred box receives an owner — *while the layout surrogate has none yet*. When the theater calls `redepthChild(deferredBox)`, the deferred box's `redepthChildren` unconditionally calls `_layoutSurrogate.redepthChild(this)`, which trips the `child.owner == owner` assertion across that owner boundary. ## Fix `_RenderDeferredLayoutBox.redepthChildren` now skips the cross-redepth when the surrogate is not yet attached, mirroring the existing guard in `_RenderLayoutSurrogateProxyBox.redepthChildren`: ```dart if (_layoutSurrogate.attached) { _layoutSurrogate.redepthChild(this); } ``` The depth invariant is restored when the surrogate is finally adopted by its parent: `_RenderLayoutSurrogateProxyBox.redepthChildren` already calls `redepthChild(_deferredLayoutChild)` once that child becomes attached. ## Tests Adds a regression test in `test/widgets/table_test.dart` placing an `OverlayPortal` whose controller is `.show()`'d before mount (mirroring `Slider`) inside a `TableRow`, asserting that no exception is thrown and the overlay child is present. Without this fix the new test reproduces the assertion. With this fix `flutter test test/widgets/table_test.dart`, `test/widgets/overlay_portal_test.dart`, `test/widgets/overlay_test.dart`, `test/widgets/raw_tooltip_test.dart`, `test/widgets/overlay_layout_builder_test.dart`, and `test/material/slider_test.dart` all pass. ## Pre-launch Checklist - [x] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs. - [x] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my responsibilities. - [x] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide]. - [x] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above. - [x] I added new tests to check the change I am making. - [x] All existing and new tests are passing. [Contributor Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/wiki/Tree-hygiene#overview [Tree Hygiene]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/wiki/Tree-hygiene [Flutter Style Guide]: https://github.com/flutter/flutter/wiki/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo --------- Co-authored-by: Victor Sanni <victorsanniay@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reverts #2