This package contains tools to work with Python coverage data.
coveragereport produces HTML reports from coverage data, with
syntax-highlighted source code and per-package aggregate numbers.
coveragediff compares two sets of coverage reports and reports
regressions, that is, increases in the number of untested lines of code.
$ coveragereport --help Usage: coveragereport [options] [inputpath [outputdir]] Converts coverage reports to HTML. If the input path is omitted, it defaults to coverage or .coverage, whichever exists. If the output directory is omitted, it defaults to inputpath + /report or ./coverage-reports, depending on whether the input path points to a directory or a file. Options: -h, --help show this help message and exit -q, --quiet be quiet -v, --verbose be verbose (default) --strip-prefix=PREFIX strip base directory from filenames loaded from .coverage --path-alias=PATH=LOCALPATH define path mappings for filenames loaded from .coverage
Example use with
$ bin/test --coverage=coverage $ coveragereport $ ln -s mypackage.html coverage/report/index.html $ xdg-open coverage/report/index.html $ xdg-open coverage/report/all.html
Example use with
$ nosetests --with-coverage --cover-erase $ coveragereport --strip-prefix=/full/path/to/source/ $ ln -s mypackage.html coverage-reports/index.html $ xdg-open coverage-reports/index.html $ xdg-open coverage-reports/all.html
You need enscript
installed and available in your
$PATH if you want syntax
Usage: coveragediff [options] olddir newdir Options: -h, --help show this help message and exit --include=REGEX only consider files matching REGEX --exclude=REGEX ignore files matching REGEX --email=ADDR send the report to a given email address (only if regressions were found) --from=ADDR set the email sender address --subject=SUBJECT set the email subject --web-url=BASEURL include hyperlinks to HTML-ized coverage reports at a given URL
Usage example with
$ bin/test --coverage=coverage $ vi src/... $ mv coverage coverage.old $ bin/test --coverage=coverage $ coveragediff coverage.old coverage
You cannot use
coverage.py data. More on that below.
$ coveragediff coverage.old coverage my.package.module: 36 new lines of untested code my.package.newmodule: new file with 15 lines of untested code (out of 23)
Output with clickable links:
$ coveragediff coverage.old coverage --web-url=http://example.com/coverage my.package.module: 36 new lines of untested code See http://example.com/coverage/my.package.module.html my.package.newmodule: new file with 15 lines of untested code (out of 23) See http://example.com/coverage/my.package.newmodule.html
Output via email, convenient for continuous integration:
$ coveragediff coverage.old coverage --web-url=http://example.com/coverage \ --email 'Developers <email@example.com>' \ --from 'Buildbot <firstname.lastname@example.org>'
That last example doesn't produce any output, but sends an email (via SMTP to localhost:25).
produce a directory full of files named
that contain source code annotated with coverage information. To get
coveragediff accept this as inputs.
coverage.py can produce
.coverage file containing (incomplete) coverage information. To get it,
coverage run bin/testrunner
coveragereport can take the
.coverage file as an input, but it
also needs access to the matching source files. And you have to manually
specify the absolute pathname prefix of your source tree so that the
report know how to translate filenames into dotted package names. Also,
it's not enough to have absolute pathnames, you need to supply the
canonical absolute pathname (with no symlink segments), such as returned
os.path.realpath. This is very inconvenient. Sorry.
coveragediff is unable to compare two
.coverage files and report
regressions. One reason for that is the incompleteness of the data format
(it line numbers of executed statements, but doesn't say which lines contain
code and which ones are blank/comments/continuation lines/excluded source
lines). The other reason is simpler: nobody wrote the code. ;)
coverage annotate does not produce files compatible
coveragediff. This could also be remedied
if somebody wrote a patch.
If you want to use a
.coverage file produced on another machine
or simply in a different working directory, you will need to
coveragereport how to adjust the absolute filenames so that
the sources can be found. Use the
--path-alias option for that.
Alternatively you could use
coverage combine to manipulate the
.coverage file itself, as described in the documentation.
*.cover annotated-source format produced by
actually comes from the Python standard library module trace.py. You can probably use trace.py
directly. I've never tried.
Some people prefer the look of the reports produced by z3c.coverage. Some people find per-package coverage summaries or the tree-like navigation convenient.
coverage.py is much faster, but using it (and hooking it up to z3c.coverage)
is perhaps less convenient. E.g. if you use
zc.buildout 1.5.x with
zc.recipe.testrunner, you will be unable to use
coverage run bin/test
because of mystic semi-broken site isolation magic of the former.
Does asking myself count?