Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Please run with --runnerMode=DEBUG and attach the log.
Original comment by corbinrs...@gmail.com
on 28 Dec 2011 at 9:18
I used this config with jstd 1.3.4b and coverage 1.3.4b
------------
server: http://127.0.0.1:4242
load:
- js/*.js
test:
- test/*.js
plugin:
- name: "coverage"
jar: "/Users/arlenwalker/bin/plugins/coverage.jar"
module: "com.google.jstestdriver.coverage.CoverageModule"
---------------------------
to produce the attached log on OSX Lion from the command line. Interesting
thing is if I swap out jsTestDriver-1.3.4 for the 1.3.2 version, and do exactly
the same thing, I get a real coverage report. So currently I test and debug
using 1.3.4, then stop the server and run 1.3.2 when I want to check my
coverage. This is tedious.
FWIW, here's what the 1.3.2 coverage reads, for the same codebase:
Total 44 tests (Passed: 44; Fails: 0; Errors: 0) (160.00 ms)
Safari 534.55.3 Mac OS: Run 44 tests (Passed: 44; Fails: 0; Errors 0) (160.00 ms)
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/Board_images_test.js:
100.0% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/board_test.js: 100.0%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/converter_test.js:
100.0% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/Move_test.js: 100.0%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/My_move_test.js: 100.0%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/My_square_test.js:
100.0% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/Pgn_test.js: 100.0%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/test/v_square_test.js: 100.0%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/Board.js: 0.37664783%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/BoardImages.js: 54.166668%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/Converter.js: 62.46246%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/isYahoo.js: 33.333336%
covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/Move.js: 100.0% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/MyMove.js: 100.0% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/MySquare.js: 100.0% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/Pgn.js: 82.86853% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/vSquare.js: 100.0% covered
/Users/arlenwalker/Documents/Development/marshall/js/Yahoo.js: 2.7027028%
covered
So obviously something changed. It appears to have stopped working with 1.3.3c,
while it worked with 1.3.3b (or at least the screen report seems good -- didn't
check it with genhtml)
Original comment by arlen.wa...@gmail.com
on 7 Apr 2012 at 4:18
Attachments:
+1, code coverage in safari is not working
Original comment by ehu...@mobileiron.com
on 5 Jul 2012 at 7:20
I have been trying to get coverage data on 1.3.4-b and 1.3.5 with no luck
Original comment by mahe...@gmail.com
on 8 Nov 2012 at 12:07
BTW, I'm using PhantomJS in a CI environment with ant
Original comment by mahe...@gmail.com
on 8 Nov 2012 at 12:42
I'm seeing the same thing as well. I can get code coverage to work with 1.3.3b
but nothing after 1.3.3c. Using phantomJS on Ubuntu.
Original comment by benjamin...@gmail.com
on 11 Dec 2012 at 6:07
The code coverage always reports 0 only in safari (Version 6.0.4) browser ..
I'm using coverage plugin version 1.3.5 on Mac OS X 10.8.3... The coverage
report works fine with chrome (Version 26) browser..
Original comment by karthi...@gmail.com
on 13 May 2013 at 11:50
The code coverage reports 0% in safari because each javascript file's are
loaded twice, so LCOV.js is getting executed again after running all the test
scripts so the Reporter object gets reset and the process test results sending
the POST request to the server with empty array for linesCovered property.
[{"testCaseName":"dummy -
module","testName":"test1","result":"passed","message":"","log":"","time":4,"dat
a":{"linesCovered":"[]"}}]
Anybody has an idea why the files are getting loaded twice ?
Original comment by karthi...@gmail.com
on 17 May 2013 at 9:08
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
lemuellu...@gmail.com
on 22 Oct 2011 at 9:05