Circumvent Codecov's legitimate complaint without resorting to pragma

[benjaminhwilliams]

Codecov recognises that we aren't testing with fsspec. Perhaps it is less picky if we use pytest.param to parametrise the tests.

TODO:

• Add unit tests and/or doctests in docstrings
• Add docstrings and API docs for any new/modified user-facing classes and functions
• New/modified features documented in docs/tutorial.rst
• Changes documented in docs/release.rst
• GitHub Actions have all passed
• Test coverage is 100% (Codecov passes)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #823 (b558e62) into master (4b03dfe) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #823   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.94%   99.94%           
=======================================
  Files          31       31           
  Lines       10606    10606           
=======================================
  Hits        10600    10600           
  Misses          6        6           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
zarr/tests/test_dim_separator.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

[benjaminhwilliams]

As promised in #821 (comment), this is now ready for review.

Apologies that my silly typo incurred an extra round of CI checks, redundantly chewing through more electrons than was necessary.

[joshmoore]

redundantly chewing through more electrons than was necessary.

Heh. We need a CO2 counter per PR (and/or [skip ci])

[joshmoore]

Thanks for the increase in sanity!

[jakirkham]

Ah good catch. Thanks for adding this Ben! 😄