# New code definition not acknowledged by sonarcloud.io filter **URL:** \ **Category:** SonarQube Cloud\ **Tags:** bitbucket, pull-request, new-code, sonarqube-cloud\ **Created:** [July 4, 2024, 10:39am UTC](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/new-code-definition-not-acknowledged-by-sonarcloud-io-filter/118395 "2024-07-04T10:39:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 8
**Author:** ![Faheem\_Husain](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/sonarsource/user_avatar/community.sonarsource.com/faheem_husain/32/54829_2.png) [@Faheem\_Husain](https://community.sonarsource.com/u/Faheem_Husain)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2024, 7:40am UTC](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/new-code-definition-not-acknowledged-by-sonarcloud-io-filter/118395/8 "2024-07-10T07:40:08Z")
It is not the case of path of files change. I have validated that. It is mostly likely what is mentioned in this comment: [Removing comment in a file is scanning the whole file in PR analysis - #4 by ganncamp](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/removing-comment-in-a-file-is-scanning-the-whole-file-in-pr-analysis/56750/4) From my initial analysis, it looks like I might be confusing whole function with whole file. Or is it how sonarcloud scan for pull request is supposed to work? I can see old issues in the same file that are in “Full Analysis” that are not raised in the pull request. But some of the issues raised in the pull request itself are not relevant to the lines changed in the pull request. I won’t be able to share the examples here since the file contents might be sensitive. --- _[View the full topic](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/new-code-definition-not-acknowledged-by-sonarcloud-io-filter/118395)._