Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Allow coverage tests to be executed with option inline=no #865

Closed
ronisbr opened this issue Oct 30, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Allow coverage tests to be executed with option inline=no #865

ronisbr opened this issue Oct 30, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@ronisbr
Copy link
Member

ronisbr commented Oct 30, 2018

Hi!

It turns out that Julia reports very wrong coverage information in some cases if the data is generated without --inline=no (see JuliaCI/Coverage.jl#187). Hence, I think it is necessary to provide a way to execute the package test with this option. Otherwise, at least for my case, the coverage information generated at Travis for Coveralls and Codecov is really wrong.
@tkoolen
Copy link
Contributor

tkoolen commented Oct 30, 2018

While this would be good to have anyway, do note that JuliaLang/julia#28192 (comment) reports that --inline=no is not a solution to the code coverage problems.

@fingolfin
Copy link
Member

@tkoolen it is not clear from me that the comment you link to is accurate. In particular, it's not clear what exactly they "tried" to come to that conclusion. After all, the reason @ronisbr has filed this is issue is that simply passing --inline-no to julia is not enough, a change to Pkg.test is apparently needed.

@fingolfin fingolfin mentioned this issue Oct 30, 2018
Closed
@fingolfin
Copy link
Member

PR #866 attempts to resolve this.

@ronisbr
Copy link
Member Author

ronisbr commented Oct 30, 2018

In my case (ReferenceFrameRotations.jl), in which the tests and the functions are somewhat simple, I can say that inline=no improved a lot the coverage results.

@fingolfin fingolfin mentioned this issue Oct 31, 2018
Merged
bors bot added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 6, 2018
@bors @fingolfin @KristofferC
Merge #870
d41a269 
870: Transfer can_inline to subprocess r=KristofferC a=fingolfin

This is meant as an alternative to PR #866 for resolving issue #865

Co-authored-by: Max Horn <max@quendi.de>
Co-authored-by: Kristoffer Carlsson <kristoffer.carlsson@chalmers.se>
@00vareladavid
Copy link
Contributor

Resolved by #870

wdebeaum added a commit to wdebeaum/Choices.jl that referenced this issue Feb 25, 2019
@wdebeaum
try adding --inline=no to see if it improves code coverage accuracy
b902069 
See also:
 - JuliaCI/Coverage.jl#187
 - JuliaLang/julia#28192
 - JuliaLang/Pkg.jl#865
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@fingolfin @ronisbr @tkoolen @00vareladavid