Closed ericdill closed 9 years ago
I am not a huge fan of #pragma: no cover
in the code base. I would much rather we fake up __import__
http://stackoverflow.com/a/2481588/380231 to fake the exceptions or just leave them untested.
is it the actual statement "#pragma: no cover" that you don't like or the concept of adding a line comment to ignore coverage for that line that you don't like?
If it is the "#pragma: no cover" that you don't like, we can actually use anything we want. Other options include:
or really any other line comment that you can think of, those were just the fun ones that came to mind
Grrrr this is so frustrating!!
Name Stmts Miss Cover Missing
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
metadatastore 4 0 100%
metadatastore.api 2 0 100%
metadatastore.commands 333 5 98% 285-289, 926
metadatastore.conf 22 2 91% 51, 68
metadatastore.doc 105 3 97% 88-90, 128
metadatastore.examples 0 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data 0 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data.common 40 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data.multisource_event 40 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data.temperature_ramp 39 0 100%
metadatastore.odm_templates 40 0 100%
metadatastore.utils 0 0 100%
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 625 10 98%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 95 tests in 1.380s
OK
Name Stmts Miss Cover Missing
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
metadatastore 4 0 100%
metadatastore.api 2 0 100%
metadatastore.commands 333 1 99% 926
metadatastore.conf 22 1 95% 51
metadatastore.doc 105 0 100%
metadatastore.examples 0 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data 0 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data.common 40 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data.multisource_event 40 0 100%
metadatastore.examples.sample_data.temperature_ramp 39 0 100%
metadatastore.odm_templates 40 0 100%
metadatastore.utils 0 0 100%
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 625 2 99%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 95 tests in 0.880s
OK
the concept of comments flagging skipping coverage tests
Well then, here's a fun gotcha... after git clean -xfd
, my local machine now produces results that match travis
@tacaswell This is as much work as I am willing to put in for now. I am bored of trying to get all the lines covered. If you've got no objections, could you merge this in its current state?
at least locally, let's see what coveralls thinks