Closed mknaranja closed 1 year ago
Interestingly, I get the following locally with gcc-10.4
Overall coverage rate:
lines......: 92.0% (6245 of 6790 lines)
functions..: 95.3% (4063 of 4264 functions)
Reading tracefile coverage.info
|Lines |Functions|Branches
Filename |Rate Num|Rate Num|Rate Num
================================================================================
[/localdata1/kueh_mj/code/memilio/cpp/]
memilio/compartments/compartmentalmodel.h |92.3% 26|78.6% 28| - 0
memilio/compartments/parameter_studies.h | 100% 30| 100% 11| - 0
memilio/compartments/simulation.h | 100% 26|93.1% 29| - 0
memilio/data/analyze_result.cpp |98.9% 91| 100% 7| - 0
memilio/data/analyze_result.h | 100% 31| 100% 5| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/age_group.h | 100% 3| 100% 1| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/contact_matrix.h |96.3% 134|95.0% 120| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/damping.h |96.5% 143|89.0% 146| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/damping_sampling.h | 100% 63| 100% 26| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/dynamic_npis.h |99.0% 99|83.3% 42| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/populations.h |95.1% 61| 100% 41| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/regions.cpp |32.3% 65| 100% 4| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/uncertain_matrix.cpp |92.5% 40|90.9% 11| - 0
memilio/epidemiology/uncertain_matrix.h |88.2% 34|87.5% 8| - 0
memilio/io/epi_data.cpp |90.0% 10| 100% 1| - 0
memilio/io/epi_data.h |97.9% 140| 100% 24| - 0
memilio/io/hdf5_cpp.h | 100% 16| 100% 4| - 0
memilio/io/io.cpp |87.0% 23| 100% 4| - 0
memilio/io/io.h |70.5% 139|91.1% 470| - 0
memilio/io/json_serializer.h |87.7% 219|98.2% 226| - 0
memilio/io/mobility_io.cpp |84.4% 77| 100% 4| - 0
memilio/io/mobility_io.h |85.2% 61| 100% 2| - 0
memilio/io/result_io.cpp |95.2% 104| 100% 4| - 0
memilio/io/result_io.h | 100% 8| 100% 3| - 0
memilio/math/adapt_rk.cpp |98.6% 71| 100% 3| - 0
memilio/math/adapt_rk.h | 100% 17| 100% 5| - 0
memilio/math/eigen_util.h | 100% 71|92.6% 81| - 0
memilio/math/euler.cpp | 100% 5| 100% 1| - 0
memilio/math/floating_point.h | 100% 10| 100% 4| - 0
memilio/math/integrator.cpp |95.5% 22| 100% 1| - 0
memilio/math/integrator.h | 100% 12|92.3% 13| - 0
memilio/math/interpolation.h | 100% 3| 100% 1| - 0
memilio/math/matrix_shape.h | 100% 44| 100% 23| - 0
memilio/math/smoother.h | 100% 11| 100% 7| - 0
memilio/math/stepper_wrapper.h | 100% 32| 100% 24| - 0
memilio/mobility/graph.h |89.3% 56|84.1% 82| - 0
memilio/mobility/graph_simulation.h | 100% 28| 100% 15| - 0
memilio/mobility/mobility.h |89.1% 137|80.0% 65| - 0
memilio/utils/compiler_diagnostics.h | 100% 2| 100% 2| - 0
memilio/utils/custom_index_array.h |99.4% 154|98.3% 484| - 0
memilio/utils/date.h |92.5% 93|92.3% 13| - 0
memilio/utils/index.h | 100% 40| 100% 117| - 0
memilio/utils/logging.h |57.1% 42|41.4% 29| - 0
memilio/utils/memory.h |86.7% 15|88.9% 9| - 0
memilio/utils/parameter_distributions.h |92.3% 169|97.2% 36| - 0
memilio/utils/parameter_set.h | 100% 73|99.7% 672| - 0
memilio/utils/pointer_dereferencing_iterator.h | 100% 5| 100% 2| - 0
memilio/utils/random_number_generator.h |98.5% 68|97.6% 41| - 0
memilio/utils/span.h | 100% 12|88.9% 9| - 0
memilio/utils/stl_util.h | 100% 59| 100% 359| - 0
memilio/utils/time_series.h |96.6% 205|98.3% 173| - 0
memilio/utils/transform_iterator.h | 100% 23| 100% 17| - 0
memilio/utils/type_safe.h |96.4% 55|89.7% 184| - 0
memilio/utils/uncertain_value.cpp | 100% 11| 100% 4| - 0
memilio/utils/uncertain_value.h |70.7% 58|78.6% 14| - 0
memilio/utils/visitor.h |62.5% 8|50.0% 8| - 0
models/abm/household.cpp | 100% 34| 100% 5| - 0
models/abm/household.h | 100% 25| 100% 9| - 0
models/abm/location.cpp |99.1% 112| 100% 10| - 0
models/abm/location.h | 100% 29| 100% 11| - 0
models/abm/lockdown_rules.cpp | 100% 12| 100% 3| - 0
models/abm/migration_rules.cpp |85.1% 74|80.0% 10| - 0
models/abm/parameters.h | 100% 52| 100% 26| - 0
models/abm/person.cpp |96.9% 97|93.8% 16| - 0
models/abm/person.h | 100% 18| 100% 8| - 0
models/abm/random_events.h | 100% 13|75.0% 16| - 0
models/abm/simulation.cpp | 100% 20| 100% 3| - 0
models/abm/simulation.h | 100% 2| 100% 1| - 0
models/abm/testing_strategy.cpp |97.3% 111|96.2% 26| - 0
models/abm/testing_strategy.h | 100% 2| 100% 2| - 0
models/abm/time.h | 100% 61| 100% 28| - 0
models/abm/trip_list.cpp | 100% 12|83.3% 6| - 0
models/abm/trip_list.h | 100% 15| 100% 4| - 0
models/abm/world.cpp |81.4% 118|66.7% 27| - 0
models/abm/world.h | 100% 6| 100% 2| - 0
models/ide_seir/model.cpp |79.0% 62|85.7% 7| - 0
models/ide_seir/parameters.h | 100% 10| 100% 4| - 0
models/ode_secir/analyze_result.h | 100% 65| 100% 49| - 0
models/ode_secir/model.h |99.3% 136|93.8% 16| - 0
models/ode_secir/parameter_space.cpp | 100% 110| 100% 7| - 0
models/ode_secir/parameters.h |75.1% 197| 100% 44| - 0
models/ode_secir/parameters_io.cpp |89.4% 218| 100% 17| - 0
models/ode_secir/parameters_io.h |97.0% 100| 100% 4| - 0
models/ode_secirvvs/analyze_result.h | 100% 112| 100% 94| - 0
models/ode_secirvvs/model.h |97.7% 390| 100% 12| - 0
models/ode_secirvvs/parameter_space.cpp |89.9% 109|75.0% 4| - 0
models/ode_secirvvs/parameters.h |63.8% 188| 100% 41| - 0
models/ode_secirvvs/parameters_io.cpp |84.5% 239|95.5% 22| - 0
models/ode_secirvvs/parameters_io.h |96.3% 761| 100% 5| - 0
models/ode_seir/model.h | 100% 18| 100% 2| - 0
models/ode_seir/parameters.h | 100% 8| 100% 4| - 0
================================================================================
Total:|92.0% 6790|95.3% 4k| - 0
I have a strong feeling that
2022-11-25T16:23:33.8702714Z
2022-11-25T16:23:33.8702950Z [----------] 7 tests from TestSaveParameters
2022-11-25T16:23:33.8703402Z [ RUN ] TestSaveParameters.json_single_sim_write_read_compare
2022-11-25T16:23:33.9018905Z [ OK ] TestSaveParameters.json_single_sim_write_read_compare (31 ms)
2022-11-25T16:23:33.9019443Z [ RUN ] TestSaveParameters.json_uncertain_matrix_write_read_compare
2022-11-25T16:23:33.9134622Z /home/runner/work/memilio/memilio/cpp/build/_deps/jsoncpp-src/src/lib_json/json_reader.cpp:1559:39: runtime error: negation of -9223372036854775808 cannot be represented in type 'long long int'; cast to an unsigned type to negate this value to itself
is the reason for that. It makes the test execution break down in CI.
What I find strange nevertheless is that the CI item gives an "Okay" status.
Will be corrected with #477 and #479
Due to some unknown, changed behavior of (probably?) lcov, our code coverage dropped from 90 to 60 % in one day.
It was still high at about 90% in https://github.com/DLR-SC/memilio/actions/runs/3493936927/jobs/5849427987
With https://github.com/DLR-SC/memilio/actions/runs/3501838610/jobs/5865945170 code coverage dropped.
Probably, the difference (or error?) is to be found in test-cpp-gcc_clang (gcc, Debug, latest) which gives
and test-cpp-gcc_clang (gcc, Debug, latest) which gives