tns test <platform> include coverage?

[dtopuzov]

From @NickIliev on June 20, 2016 11:31

From @NickIliev on June 20, 2016 10:56

From @georgeedwards on June 17, 2016 12:46

Feature Request:

Can the tns test <platform> command include coverage reporting as part of it's output? Karma-Coverage seems to be quite a nice way of doing this. To add support for Typescript, adding in remap-istanbul looks to be the most straight forward solution.

Copied from original issue: NativeScript/NativeScript#2333

Copied from original issue: #1865

Copied from original issue: NativeScript/nativescript-unit-test-runner#12

[dtopuzov]

From @casche on October 14, 2016 15:0

@NickIliev @georgeedwards is anyone working on this or is there an eta ⌛️ ?

I've tried to get this executing with istanbul:

    files: [
      'app/**/*.js',
    ],

    preprocessors: {
      'app/**/!(*spec).js': ['coverage']
    },

    reporters: ['progress', 'coverage'],

But it just generates an empty report. I can't really tell what tns test is really doing to debug it. Or am I just missing something simple ? 😞

[dtopuzov]

From @joeskeen on October 17, 2016 22:12

@casche I was really struggling with this as well, but I just got it working. Could you post your full karma.conf.js file and I can compare it with what I have?

Edit: I got my Karma config file cleaned up and here is the config that is working for me:

(Note that I am just using karma-coverage. I'm trying to do remapping to TS source files but I haven't gotten that working yet.)

module.exports = function(config) {
  config.set({

    // base path that will be used to resolve all patterns (eg. files, exclude)
    basePath: '',


    // frameworks to use
    // available frameworks: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-adapter
    frameworks: ['jasmine'],


    // list of files / patterns to load in the browser
    files: [
      'app/**/*.js',
    ],


    // list of files to exclude
    exclude: [
    ],


    // preprocess matching files before serving them to the browser
    // available preprocessors: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-preprocessor
    preprocessors: {
      'app/**/!(*spec).js': ['coverage']
    },


    // test results reporter to use
    // possible values: 'dots', 'progress'
    // available reporters: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-reporter
    reporters: [
      'progress',
      'spec',
      'junit',
      'coverage'
    ],


    // web server port
    port: 9876,


    // enable / disable colors in the output (reporters and logs)
    colors: true,


    // level of logging
    // possible values: config.LOG_DISABLE || config.LOG_ERROR || config.LOG_WARN || config.LOG_INFO || config.LOG_DEBUG
    logLevel: config.LOG_DEBUG,


    // enable / disable watching file and executing tests whenever any file changes
    autoWatch: false,


    // start these browsers
    // available browser launchers: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-launcher
    browsers: [],

    customLaunchers: {
      android: {
        base: 'NS',
        platform: 'android'
      },
      ios: {
        base: 'NS',
        platform: 'ios'
      },
      ios_simulator: {
        base: 'NS',
        platform: 'ios',
        arguments: ['--emulator']
      }
    },

    coverageReporter: {
      // specify a common output directory
      dir: '.reports/coverage',
      reporters: [
          { type: 'lcov', subdir: '.' },
          { type: 'cobertura', subdir: '.' }
      ],
      includeAllSources: true
    },

    // Continuous Integration mode
    // if true, Karma captures browsers, runs the tests and exits
    singleRun: true
  })
}

The report was successfully generated for me (looks like I have some work to do on coverage ;) ):

One option that made the difference for me was coverageReporter.includeAllSources. Without it, I just got an empty report.

Update: after looking it over, the coverage results I'm getting out of this are not right. It seems that the test code isn't causing any increase of coverage, as the only lines reporting as 'covered' are the lines that the classes are declared on, but none of the functions I am calling in my test show any coverage.

[dtopuzov]

From @casche on October 20, 2016 19:11

@joeskeen thanks! 👍 I added those lines you suggested and now I get the same report as you. That is, files are listed but coverage is not increasing.

[dtopuzov]

From @phattranky on May 2, 2017 4:56

My Karma config:

Got same issue, the coverage reporter always empty. If add the coverageReporter.includeAllSources, it listing all file, but the report values not changes, and always 0 like @casche

  config.set({

    // base path that will be used to resolve all patterns (eg. files, exclude)
    basePath: '',


    // frameworks to use
    // available frameworks: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-adapter
    frameworks: ['jasmine'],

    // plugins: ['karma-jasmine', 'karma-nativescript-launcher', 'karma-typescript-preprocessor', 'karma-typescript', 'karma-coverage', 'karma-remap-coverage'],


    // list of files / patterns to load in the browser
    files: [
      'node_modules/nativescript-angular/zone-js/dist/zone-nativescript.js',
      'node_modules/zone.js/dist/long-stack-trace-zone.js',
      'node_modules/zone.js/dist/proxy.js',
      'node_modules/zone.js/dist/sync-test.js',
      'node_modules/zone.js/dist/jasmine-patch.js',
      'node_modules/zone.js/dist/async-test.js',
      'node_modules/zone.js/dist/fake-async-test.js',
      'app/**/*.ts'
    ],


    // list of files to exclude
    exclude: [
    ],


    // preprocess matching files before serving them to the browser
    // available preprocessors: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-preprocessor
    preprocessors: {
       'app/**/*.ts': ['typescript'],
       'app/**/!(*spec).ts': ['typescript', 'coverage']
    },

    typescriptPreprocessor: {
      // options passed to the typescript compiler 
      options: {
        project: './tsconfig.json'
      },
      // transforming the filenames 
      transformPath: function(path) {
        return path.replace(/\.ts$/, '.js');
      }
    },

    // test results reporter to use
    // possible values: 'dots', 'progress'
    // available reporters: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-reporter
    reporters: ['progress', 'coverage', 'remap-coverage'],


    // web server port
    port: 9876,


    // enable / disable colors in the output (reporters and logs)
    colors: true,


    // level of logging
    // possible values: config.LOG_DISABLE || config.LOG_ERROR || config.LOG_WARN || config.LOG_INFO || config.LOG_DEBUG
    logLevel: config.LOG_INFO,


    // enable / disable watching file and executing tests whenever any file changes
    autoWatch: true,


    // start these browsers
    // available browser launchers: https://npmjs.org/browse/keyword/karma-launcher
    browsers: [],

    customLaunchers: {
      android: {
        base: 'NS',
        platform: 'android'
      },
      ios: {
        base: 'NS',
        platform: 'ios'
      },
      ios_simulator: {
        base: 'NS',
        platform: 'ios',
        arguments: ['--emulator']
      }
    },

    /*
    coverageReporter: {
      // specify a common output directory
      dir: './coverage',
      reporters: [
          { type: 'lcov', subdir: '.' }
      ],
      includeAllSources: true
    },*/
    coverageReporter: {
      type: 'in-memory'
    },

    remapCoverageReporter: {
      'text-summary': null,
      html: './coverage/html',
      cobertura: './coverage/cobertura.xml'
    },

    // Continuous Integration mode
    // if true, Karma captures browsers, runs the tests and exits
    singleRun: true
  })
}``

[geertjanb]

I have the same issue as @dtopuzov

any update on this matter?

[pkoleva]

Hi @geertjanb

We currently work on making livesync and debug better, but we've summarized what we need to do with the tns test command, so we can plan it for a future release. We'll make sure to update this issue when we plan it for a specific milestone.

[Guatom]

@dtopuzov: could you make it work somehow?

[mcrvaz]

any updates on this?

[Guatom]

I gave up on this and I used node-ts + Jasmine, which worked OK. I have to say that I could see the magic behind running tests in the phone: in the node-ts + Jasmine approach I had to mock (proxyquire) every single import; tests using NativeScript framework worked just out of the box.

[SmailHammour]

@pkoleva Any news on this?

[pnahtanoj]

Coverage would be very helpful - any updates for this?