Incorrect coverage reporting 🐛
See original GitHub issueThe coverage report for 87135a5d0c3c5a27db83509fba01774dd20201d9 claims that DictionaryExtensions.cs
has 75% coverage. It only has one method:
According to the report, lines 9, 10 and 13 are covered but not line 12 (thus the 75%). How can 13 be covered but not 12? Is this a bug or am I misreading something? The only test for this method…
…seems to cover it 100%.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 5 years ago
- Comments:11 (3 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Incorrect coverage report · Issue #277 · pytest-dev/pytest-cov
Well one way to really nail this down is to have an early failure in base.py (just make a syntax error I guess)....
Read more >Incorrect coverage number reported by codecov - Bug Fixes
The problem seems to be on calculating the number of tracked lines, which is not present in the report. ti is calculated as...
Read more >Wrong coverage report in karma - istanbul
I've configured my karma.conf.js with enabled preprocessing to get a report about the code coverage of my tests. I've added this line to...
Read more >Code coverage broken in Xcode 14.2?
Today I noticed that our code coverage reporting in Xcode is showing a clearly incorrect result: 0.0% when it should be saying a...
Read more >Code coverage report shows incorrect class ... - YouTrack
Duplicates 1 issue (1 unresolved) · Right click -> Run tests with coverage · Inspect coverage report · See class coverage for a...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
@atifaziz I have noticed this little kinks here and there. Currently trying to find the root cause, intend to have it fixed by this weekend
@OneCyrus @atifaziz This issue has been fixed in #10 and you’ll see that the coverage for this repo increased as a result.
It was actually a pretty straightforward fix and a good side effect is it sets the foundation for branch coverage support. This fix will be in a new NuGet package I’ll release this weekend, in the future I’ll setup a nightly CI package publish so improvements can get out faster.
Cheers