Emit absolute values for aggregation #249
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ChaitanyaPramod
suggested changes
Sep 10, 2018
| @@ -26,16 +26,20 @@ | |||
| private float classesCoveragePercent = -1; | |||
| private float methodCoveragePercent = -1; | |||
| private float lineCoveragePercent = -1; | |||
| private float linesCovered = -1; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are integral values, so int would be more appropriate type
This was referenced Sep 28, 2018
|
This is fixed as part of 6cb7413 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a proposal/WIP to emit absolute line coverage numbers in addition to the current percentages. This information is useful for aggregating coverage data from multiple sources.
A corresponding diff in Uberalls would be responsible for consuming and persisting this data.
I haven't considered backwards compatibility issues. I imagine we would want to keep the legacy constructors around for anyone with custom reporter implementations.
I have no intention of landing this -- anyone is free to pick it up. This would certainly need some additional testing (in addition to fixing the couple of failures).