Rcov and #should vs. #expect matchers

[oddlyzen]

We've seen some seemingly bizarre behavior in some of our coverage runs as of late (specifically code reported as uncovered when we are obiously covering it) and in attempting to track down the issues, I've noticed that much of the spec code uses the older #should-style rather that Rspec's #expect matchers. Many of the newer specs use the newer syntax. Could it be possible that the combination of the old- and new-style matchers is causing code to report as uncovered when it is? Thanks in advance.

[abedra]

Two quick questions.

• Are you still using Ruby 1.8.x?
• Can you provide a runnable sample?

I have some ideas about what might be going on, but I need a reproducible example to be able to fix it. If you are on Ruby 1.8.x please consider upgrading to at least 1.9.x or higher due to the lack of continued security updates on the 1.8.x branch. Also, if you upgrade, you should move to simplecov. Happy to take a look at this provided an example though.

[oddlyzen]

@abedra Yes, we are on 1.8.7. Also, after looking through some of the other issues, I think this might be related to namespaces. I believe this issue can be closed. Thanks—and my apologies for not getting back to you sooner.

Cheers! 🍺