I'd like to be able to use next-error and previous-error in Emacs with diff-cover's output

[glyph]

This is similar to -f parseable from pylint - which, oddly, diff-cover appears to require although it can't output :)

[Bachmann1234]

Looks good, tests broke due to the change in output but should be easy to fix.

Thanks for the PR!

[glyph]

@Bachmann1234 thanks! I was mainly filing this as a feature-request; any pointers on where I should look to fix the tests?

[Bachmann1234]

Sure! So the diff-cover/diff-quality test suite is... integration test heavy. A lot of the tests depend on the output of specific commands/reports.

So your pr modified the console report template.

Looking at the failures updating these files would fix things

pep8_violations_report.txt
pyflakes_violations_report.txt
pyflakes_two_files.txt
pylint_violations_console_report.txt
add_console_report.txt
pylint_dupe_violations_report.txt

It may not be obvious what the src_path should be in the errors. But I guess you can just see what is outputting and base your changes on that. Make sense? Or you can look at the corresponding diff fixture the test loads up.

[Bachmann1234]

As a separate question. Is there any other work I would need to support this emacs feature? Or does this PR cover it. I am fairly ignorant of Emacs but if you know the things that can be done I can make a note to do them when I get around to it.

Though full disclosure, its looking like a super busy few months for me so for the most part im mostly in "triage" mode.

[glyph]

As a separate question. Is there any other work I would need to support this emacs feature? Or does this PR cover it. I am fairly ignorant of Emacs but if you know the things that can be done I can make a note to do them when I get around to it.

Nope, emacs has a pretty standard regex that will work if you run stuff from M-x compile.

[glyph]

Was this just closed because it has been stale for a while or is there a different fix available?

[Bachmann1234]

Mostly cuse its stale.... looking back over the changes there actually may not be a need to close. I was closing old PRs because the code had changed a fair amount... But this change is fairly simple... Let me reopen. I cant promise anything but perhaps I can find sometime in January to give this some love.

[glyph]

Thanks a ton!

[glyph]

This is now stacked on top of #76 so that should probably be merged first, but I believe the tests should pass now.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-0.04%) to 99.057% when pulling 17337bc on glyph:master into 85c3095 on Bachmann1234:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 99.097% when pulling 17337bc on glyph:master into 85c3095 on Bachmann1234:master.

[Bachmann1234]

Nice! Ill look this over either later tonight or tomorrow!

[Bachmann1234]

https://pypi.org/project/diff_cover/1.0.3/ released!

[glyph]

Thanks so much for bearing with me over such a long period of time :)