Skip to content
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

Add branch coverage reporting #1743

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Nov 28, 2019
Merged

Add branch coverage reporting #1743

merged 2 commits into from Nov 28, 2019

Conversation

fubuloubu added 2 commits Nov 26, 2019
@codecov-io

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

codecov-io commented Nov 27, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #1743 into master will decrease coverage by 4.9%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #1743      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    91.9%     87%   -4.91%     
=========================================
  Files          48      48              
  Lines        5647    5647              
  Branches        0    1514    +1514     
=========================================
- Hits         5190    4913     -277     
  Misses        457     457              
- Partials        0     277     +277
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
vyper/types/convert.py 76.66% <0%> (-11.34%) ⬇️
vyper/settings.py 80% <0%> (-10%) ⬇️
vyper/cli/vyper_json.py 84.67% <0%> (-8.88%) ⬇️
vyper/signatures/event_signature.py 83.82% <0%> (-8.83%) ⬇️
vyper/parser/global_context.py 81.4% <0%> (-7.44%) ⬇️
vyper/optimizer.py 71.42% <0%> (-7.15%) ⬇️
vyper/signatures/interface.py 85.96% <0%> (-7.02%) ⬇️
vyper/parser/memory_allocator.py 86.66% <0%> (-6.67%) ⬇️
vyper/exceptions.py 90.16% <0%> (-6.56%) ⬇️
vyper/parser/lll_node.py 84% <0%> (-6.5%) ⬇️
... and 25 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ab99e8b...adf47d8. Read the comment docs.

@fubuloubu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

fubuloubu commented Nov 27, 2019

Note: the large change in coverage is due to this PR enabling branch coverage, which is a stricter form of coverage many projects opt not to do. Also, their algorithm for counting branch partials is a little pessimistic IMO, but what can you do?

@charles-cooper

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

charles-cooper commented Nov 27, 2019

Seems pretty good, are there any downsides to this

@fubuloubu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

fubuloubu commented Nov 27, 2019

No downsides, just looks a little worse for us because branch coverage is more strict than line coverage. To give an example:

if condition:  # Branch coverage cares about both states of this condition
    do_something()  # Line coverage only cares that this was reached
# else - Line coverage doesn't care if the false-y scenario was executed
@fubuloubu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

fubuloubu commented Nov 27, 2019

@jacqueswww 👍 and can merge

@jacqueswww jacqueswww merged commit 124a189 into master Nov 28, 2019
4 checks passed
4 checks passed
lint
Details
py36-core
Details
py37-core
Details
py38-core
Details
@fubuloubu fubuloubu deleted the fubuloubu/cov-branch branch Nov 28, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.