-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 350
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add code coverage tooling to the CI #172
Comments
My quick local trial:
The last one actually gives nice results to help me finish up covering |
After working with the
Or for everything
|
Nice. We can run this as part of the CI, and publish a report somewhere. |
@maurolacy this might be an interesting task for Bart if he has experience with any such tooling. CI stuff, but it does give insight into the project structure |
It would be great to see the code coverage on the contract code from the unit tests. To see if critical checks/branches are properly covered.
One popular tool seems to be
tarpaulin
. But I am open to any other tool as well. (Note tarpaulin has a caveat about signals which is needed for any of the wasm/vm tests, but not when running contracts as native rust).Deliverable:
It would nice to run this locally as well. You can look at #171 as a possible way for scripts to work in CI as well as locally.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: