Test coverage report

[aleksandrenko]

Add a test coverage progress indicator to push developers to write more unit tests (Gamification)

[ArtemGovorov]

Good idea, thanks. We are planning to add something like this along with coverage reports at some stage.

[ArtemGovorov]

Good idea, thanks. We are planning to add something like this along with coverage reports at some stage.

[Tineler]

As I wrote on Twitter: I would love to see that! I think you could display the coverage for a single file somewhere in the upper right corner of the editor (if this is somehow possible). And the overall coverage in the run-console.

[Tineler]

As I wrote on Twitter: I would love to see that! I think you could display the coverage for a single file somewhere in the upper right corner of the editor (if this is somehow possible). And the overall coverage in the run-console.

[browniefed]

👍

[browniefed]

👍

[endragor]

+1 to a view showing aggregated coverage info for the whole project (not sure if this is what the original poster meant)

[endragor]

+1 to a view showing aggregated coverage info for the whole project (not sure if this is what the original poster meant)

[DinisCruz]

+1 this is really important

While we wait for official support, where is this data stored?

[DinisCruz]

+1 this is really important

While we wait for official support, where is this data stored?

[ArtemGovorov]

@DinisCruz It is stored in memory, wallaby doesn't save any files if that's what you're asking about

[ArtemGovorov]

@DinisCruz It is stored in memory, wallaby doesn't save any files if that's what you're asking about

[DinisCruz]

is there a way to access that data?

[DinisCruz]

is there a way to access that data?

[ArtemGovorov]

@DinisCruz Not at the moment.

[ArtemGovorov]

@DinisCruz Not at the moment.

[hellboy81]

I mean also to track "writing progress".

Is there some metrics to answer the following questions:

• How much additional time does unit testing take?
• Estimating of testing effort as a percentage of development time
• How do you estimate the time needed to write unit tests?

[hellboy81]

I mean also to track "writing progress".

Is there some metrics to answer the following questions:

• How much additional time does unit testing take?
• Estimating of testing effort as a percentage of development time
• How do you estimate the time needed to write unit tests?

[hellboy81]

This metrics can be also reasonable:

• Estimate time to write unit tests for existing code (with code coverage at least N %)

[hellboy81]

This metrics can be also reasonable:

• Estimate time to write unit tests for existing code (with code coverage at least N %)

[fvanwijk]

@hellboy81 Hmm I think that calculating the estimates is no issue that Wallaby should solve. It's more like a Sonar thing (time to solve tech debt and tech debt percentage).

[fvanwijk]

@hellboy81 Hmm I think that calculating the estimates is no issue that Wallaby should solve. It's more like a Sonar thing (time to solve tech debt and tech debt percentage).

[hellboy81]

@fvanwijk Can you provide more information about it?

[hellboy81]

@fvanwijk Can you provide more information about it?

[fvanwijk]

See http://www.sonarqube.org/evaluate-your-technical-debt-with-sonar/
Wallaby is just a test runner.
I suggest that you use tools like Sonar to do more in dept code quality/coverage analysis and let Wallaby only show the simple metrics that are already available, since it is measuring coverage through the instrumented code.

[fvanwijk]

See http://www.sonarqube.org/evaluate-your-technical-debt-with-sonar/
Wallaby is just a test runner.
I suggest that you use tools like Sonar to do more in dept code quality/coverage analysis and let Wallaby only show the simple metrics that are already available, since it is measuring coverage through the instrumented code.

[hellboy81]

@fvanwijk KISS, use Excel, Luke!

[hellboy81]

@fvanwijk KISS, use Excel, Luke!

[QuantumInformation]

Is there coverage build into the Idea version for wallaybyjs?

[QuantumInformation]

Is there coverage build into the Idea version for wallaybyjs?

[ArtemGovorov]

@QuantumInformation Only real-time coverage indicators (like in all other versions), no reports yet.

[ArtemGovorov]

@QuantumInformation Only real-time coverage indicators (like in all other versions), no reports yet.

[QuantumInformation]

Ok cool, well I'm very happy with it, I'm going to recommend it to my clients!

[QuantumInformation]

Ok cool, well I'm very happy with it, I'm going to recommend it to my clients!

[tomitrescak]

Any progress on this? Would be great to see the overall statistics of the test coverage.

[tomitrescak]

Any progress on this? Would be great to see the overall statistics of the test coverage.

[DinisCruz]

Any updates, this is quite an important metric

[DinisCruz]

Any updates, this is quite an important metric

[ArtemGovorov]

@tomitrescak @DinisCruz I'll post the news in this issue when there are some.

[ArtemGovorov]

@tomitrescak @DinisCruz I'll post the news in this issue when there are some.

[ArtemGovorov]

We are working on the file-centric Coverage View in Wallaby App, in a meantime the already implemented Tests View can also be used to to inspect the coverage.

[ArtemGovorov]

We are working on the file-centric Coverage View in Wallaby App, in a meantime the already implemented Tests View can also be used to to inspect the coverage.

[DinisCruz]

@ArtemGovorov that App view is great

Question: how are you authenticating that the only that app is talking to wallaby engine (i.e. can the same functionality be invoked from other sites? (namely direct interaction with Webstorm)

[DinisCruz]

@ArtemGovorov that App view is great

Question: how are you authenticating that the only that app is talking to wallaby engine (i.e. can the same functionality be invoked from other sites? (namely direct interaction with Webstorm)

[ArtemGovorov]

@DinisCruz Thanks! We're also working on the file-centric view for the code coverage, which should better address this particular issue.
In the engine we are checking the origin header that contains the hostname of the server that served the HTML with the JS that opened the WebSocket connection, so other websites can not connect to the engine.

[ArtemGovorov]

@DinisCruz Thanks! We're also working on the file-centric view for the code coverage, which should better address this particular issue.
In the engine we are checking the origin header that contains the hostname of the server that served the HTML with the JS that opened the WebSocket connection, so other websites can not connect to the engine.

[ArtemGovorov]

Coming soon (this week): https://twitter.com/wallabyjs/status/765798386314412033

[ArtemGovorov]

Coming soon (this week): https://twitter.com/wallabyjs/status/765798386314412033

[dsifford]

Amazing @ArtemGovorov !

Question for ya: Is there any way currently, or any plans for the near future, to open up the app view inside atom editor? I'd imagine adding that feature would be relatively straightforward, being that it's essentially just a feature-packed electron application.

Thanks again for your work on this!

[dsifford]

Amazing @ArtemGovorov !

Question for ya: Is there any way currently, or any plans for the near future, to open up the app view inside atom editor? I'd imagine adding that feature would be relatively straightforward, being that it's essentially just a feature-packed electron application.

Thanks again for your work on this!

[ArtemGovorov]

@dsifford There're no near future plans, but you may try using atom-web-view to open http://wallabyjs.com/app. It seems to work, but I haven't tested it much and I'd at least expect a few usability issues, like it may not look great in a different colour theme and there may be some keyboard shortcuts conflicts.

[ArtemGovorov]

@dsifford There're no near future plans, but you may try using atom-web-view to open http://wallabyjs.com/app. It seems to work, but I haven't tested it much and I'd at least expect a few usability issues, like it may not look great in a different colour theme and there may be some keyboard shortcuts conflicts.

[dsifford]

@ArtemGovorov I'm aware of the web-view package. I mainly was asking this because the thought of putting together a simple package for this crossed my mind and I wanted to be sure that A) you weren't already planning one (which would likely be better) and B) it was alright if I did so, being that wallaby is a trademarked, non-open-source product.

[dsifford]

@ArtemGovorov I'm aware of the web-view package. I mainly was asking this because the thought of putting together a simple package for this crossed my mind and I wanted to be sure that A) you weren't already planning one (which would likely be better) and B) it was alright if I did so, being that wallaby is a trademarked, non-open-source product.

[ArtemGovorov]

@dsifford If the the web-view package is not enough for now, we don't mind if you create the package that does a better job of embedding the app.

[ArtemGovorov]

@dsifford If the the web-view package is not enough for now, we don't mind if you create the package that does a better job of embedding the app.

[ArtemGovorov]

Released in Wallaby.js App v1.0.4.

[ArtemGovorov]

Released in Wallaby.js App v1.0.4.

[DinisCruz]

Hi @ArtemGovorov what was released on App v1.0.4?

[DinisCruz]

Hi @ArtemGovorov what was released on App v1.0.4?

[ArtemGovorov]

Hi @DinisCruz, the Files tab with coverage reports, the blog post/tutorial about it is coming soon (hopefully this week).

[ArtemGovorov]

Hi @DinisCruz, the Files tab with coverage reports, the blog post/tutorial about it is coming soon (hopefully this week).