Feature Request: Consume SimpleCov and Use Results to Weigh Metrics #245
Comments
TreyE
changed the title
|
@TreyE alright so the flow would be:
Although I don't think we should mix code quality with test coverage, perhaps this is useful for somebody. |
|
👍 |
|
@TreyE Is this something you're working on? If not, I'd love to make a PR. |
|
Nope, nothing I've been working on - just something I hope somebody picks up. |
Analyser::Coverage will analyse test coverage based on a .resultset.json file. We can assume that projects which are using SimpleCov will have a coverage folder with results. RubyCritic can use the results from that folder to provide a coverage section. This will help us solve the problem described in whitesmith#245. It also addresses an item in the ROADMAP.md file: ``` Integrate other gems, like: - Simplecov to provide code coverage ``` Analyser won't do anything if a .resultset.json is not present in the caller's coverage directory.
It adds a new section to the HTML report: Coverage. In that section RubyCritic will now list all the application files along with its test coverage information. This change will be necessary to display the results calculated by Analyser::Coverage and it will help improve the situation for this issue: whitesmith#245
|
@Onumis @TreyE @joshsaintjacque I really like this idea. I like it so much that I submitted a PR for it: #319 I'd really like to know your feedback about those changes. Coverage and quality data are not mixed nor combined. Coverage data now shows up in a new section. There is no need to pass in the coverage folder or |
Analyser::Coverage will analyse test coverage based on a .resultset.json file. We can assume that projects which are using SimpleCov will have a coverage folder with results. RubyCritic can use the results from that folder to provide a coverage section. This will help us solve the problem described in whitesmith#245. It also addresses an item in the ROADMAP.md file: ``` Integrate other gems, like: - Simplecov to provide code coverage ``` Analyser won't do anything if a .resultset.json is not present in the caller's coverage directory.
It adds a new section to the HTML report: Coverage. In that section RubyCritic will now list all the application files along with its test coverage information. This change will be necessary to display the results calculated by Analyser::Coverage and it will help improve the situation for this issue: whitesmith#245
Analyser::Coverage will analyse test coverage based on a .resultset.json file. We can assume that projects which are using SimpleCov will have a coverage folder with results. RubyCritic can use the results from that folder to provide a coverage section. This will help us solve the problem described in #245. It also addresses an item in the ROADMAP.md file: ``` Integrate other gems, like: - Simplecov to provide code coverage ``` Analyser won't do anything if a .resultset.json is not present in the caller's coverage directory.
It adds a new section to the HTML report: Coverage. In that section RubyCritic will now list all the application files along with its test coverage information. This change will be necessary to display the results calculated by Analyser::Coverage and it will help improve the situation for this issue: #245
|
In case you are interested in this feature, I recently release I wrote a blog post about this: https://www.fastruby.io/blog/code-quality/intruducing-skunk-stink-score-calculator.html 😃 |
It would be great if I could somehow also import simplecov results into rubycritic - and then as a result use those coverage values to help 'weigh' my metrics. Basically I want lack of test coverage to act as something that magnifies how 'bad' I consider the code to be.
A simple case would be:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: