Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

Instrumenting non used assemblies produces non existing branches (whith hits =0) in branch coverage. Lowering coverage when using /p:MergeWith

See original GitHub issue

@tonerdo When calculating the coverage from an assembly that’s referenced in another test project, I get some differences on branch coverage than when i run the tests for the actual test project that is ment to test that assembly

+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| Module               | Line   | Branch | Method |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Api         | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Application | 100%   | 60%    | 100%   |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Data        | 100%   | 62.5%  | 100%   |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+

But separately:

ProjectName.Data:

+---------------+--------+--------+--------+
| Module        | Line   | Branch | Method |
+---------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Data | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+---------------+--------+--------+--------+

ProjectName.Application:

+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| Module               | Line   | Branch | Method |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Application | 100%   | 75%    | 100%   |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|ProjectName.Data        | 0%     | 0%     | 0%     |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+

ProjectName.Api:

+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| Module               | Line   | Branch | Method |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Api         | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectNameApplication | 0%     | 0%     | 0%     |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Data        | 0%     | 0%     | 0%     |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+

So my idea was to get:

+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| Module               | Line   | Branch | Method |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Application | 100%   | 75%    | 100%   |
+---------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Data | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+---------------+--------+--------+--------+
| ProjectName.Api         | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+----------------------+--------+--------+--------+

Just noticed ProjectName.Application detects some branches of the ProjectName.Data that ProjectName.Data does not detect when running the coverage for itself alone.

Is this normal/possible?

"ProjectName.Repositories.KeyRepository/<AddAsync>d__4": {
        "System.Void ProjectName.Repositories.KeyRepository/<AddAsync>d__4::MoveNext()": {
          "Lines": {
            "34": 4,
            "35": 4,
            "36": 1,
            "37": 1,
            "40": 3,
            "41": 3,
            "42": 3
          },
"Branches": [
            {
              "Line": 41,
              "Offset": 98,
              "EndOffset": 100,
              "Path": 0,
              "Ordinal": 2,
              "Hits": 0
            },
            {
              "Line": 41,
              "Offset": 98,
              "EndOffset": 165,
              "Path": 1,
              "Ordinal": 3,
              "Hits": 0
            }
          ]

"ProjectName.Data.Repositories.KeyRepository/<AddAsync>d__4": {
        "System.Void ProjectName.Data.Repositories.KeyRepository/<AddAsync>d__4::MoveNext()": {
          "Lines": {
            "34": 4,
            "35": 4,
            "36": 1,
            "37": 1,
            "40": 3,
            "41": 3,
            "42": 3
          },
          "Branches": [
            {
              "Line": 41,
              "Offset": 98,
              "EndOffset": 165,
              "Path": 1,
              "Ordinal": 3,
              "Hits": 1
            }
          ]

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 5 years ago
Comments:22 (15 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

6reactions

pape77commented, Nov 9, 2018

@tonerdo i updated my pr to add this as an option so default behaviour remains the same and fixes the issues for those who need to exclude non used files from coverage (#225)

I got an error when doing some http post call for a vs 2015 test on app veyor. Probably if you re run it, it will work. Would you consider this for merging with this as an option? 😃

0reactions

MarcoRossignolicommented, Jan 27, 2021

Hi @pape77 it works like in the past nothing changed on that side we’re waiting to use new extension point from vstest plat https://github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet/issues/1015#issuecomment-746174446

https://github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet/blob/master/Documentation/DriversFeatures.md https://github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet/blob/master/Documentation/MSBuildIntegration.md#merging-results https://github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet/blob/master/Documentation/GlobalTool.md#coverlet-as-a-global-tool And your trick is documented for collectors https://github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet/blob/master/Documentation/VSTestIntegration.md#coverlet-options-supported-by-vstest-integration (thanks)

Top Results From Across the Web

Branch coverage never reaches 100%

The test report never reaches 100% of branch coverage because of the statement below. Why there are 6 branches to cover on a...

Apply assembly-wide `ExcludeFromCodeCoverageAttribute`

When using .NET's native code coverage collection mechanism - dotnet test with --collect "Code Coverage;Format=Cobertura", the Xunit assemblies also count ...

What Is Branch Coverage and What Does It Really Tell You?

We'll start answering the “what” question by providing a quick definition of branch coverage. We'll then follow that with an explanation of ...

QUESTION 7 Branch coverage (running a series of tests ...

The answer is FALSE. Branch coverage is not sufficient to detect all the faults in the code. Branch coverage i… View the full...

coverlet.msbuild 2.1.0

Coverlet is a cross platform code coverage library for .NET Core, with support for line, branch and method coverage.