-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 276
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
filefilter exclusions still show in Report #117
Comments
Will have a look at this within the next days. |
I fixed your problem in the following way: New release: |
I also want to filter the test coverage to include in the report only source files from a certain path.
My invocation of ReportGenerator looks like: My question is how I can get rid of the 'empty' XML's, since they give problems during later processing by third party tools. Thanks! |
I will have a look at the problem and come back to you. |
Could you please test again with this release: |
Yes, with the 4.2.4 version it works as expected; now I don't get those XML files with 0 coverage. |
I want to filter the unit test code coverage report to only show the coverage of our own code of a specific library.
We have a very structured directory system so I want to use the filefilter to exclude the third party code (its a lot easier to filter by directory rather than class). However when I do the report still shows the classes from the filtered files, their statistics are all 0 (Covered, Uncovered, Coverable, Total and Line Coverage) and the horizontal bar graph is grey but they still take up a line. I don't want to see classes of filtered files in the report at all.
I have found that the behaviour between filtering by file and class are different. If I filter by class then the class is not shown in the report at all. Unfortunately its a lot harder for me to filter by class as the class doesn't include its namespace and I don't want to maintain a class whitelist.
I am using:
Visual Studio 2017
CodeCoverage.exe for coverage.xml generation
ReportGenerator 3.0.2
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: