-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 95
[improvement] Differentiating uncovered because not tested or filtered #471
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
Comments
@Maze-fr Interesting, thanks for the ticket! ATM we only really support 3 coverage states (full, partial, none) as that was the direction the lcov file format provided. vscode-coverage-gutters/src/files/coverageparser.ts Lines 93 to 114 in b4c638f
At first glance, it doesn't appear like the package we use has that exposed atm. ---EDIT--- |
I may have a different list of filtered resources in each project, because I use a property I declared in Maven, and use it in the configuration of the JaCoCo Maven plugin. |
Hmm one option could involve parsing from the coverage file via the JaCoCo javascript module we use. If that provided the filtered files, we could then filter them out in the extension to avoid seeing those as "no coverage". A second option might involve persisting the filtered files into the vscode extension via the settings.json and then the extension could also ignore coverage (or lack of coverage) if the file path matches. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I use a filter on JaCoCo (Java) to exclude some classes from the coverage report (generated classes, POJO, Spring properties classes, Spring configuration, etc.).
When I "watch" for the coverage, the filtered classes appear as "uncovered".
Describe the solution you'd like
I would like my filtered classes to appear as "filtered" or "excluded" instead of "uncovered", so I can differentiate on sight what I uncovered from what I deliberately don't want to cover.
Describe alternatives you've considered
When a class / file isn't in the coverage report, it should be labelled as "filtered" or "excluded" instead of "uncovered".
Additional context
When searching to improve code coverage for the quality gate in Sonar, it would be nice not wasting time on filtered classes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: