Code coverage #616
ElliottKasoar
started this conversation in
General
Replies: 1 comment 2 replies
-
|
I have doubts about the utility of coverage as a metric, particularly as a target. It can lead to useless tests just to up the metric which then eliminate the utility of knowing whether a region of code is appropriately tested, i.e. people go "Oh, well it's clearly covered." Possibly more useful is just the published coverage report that you can ignore as a comment. There are, however, other actions available for coverage (e.g. https://github.com/orgoro/coverage) if we desire it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
2 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
As discussed elsewhere, and temporarily fixed by #610, coveralls has been having frequent outages over the past month or so.
We are therefore reevaluating how/whether we track coverage. There are a few options:
I think having coverage for
janus-coreis a useful distinction compared to some alternatives, as it's quite a simple way to show we take the software engineering seriously, which includes testing.For other projects that are more UI focused e.g. ML-PEG, ALC-UX, coverage is significantly harder, so perhaps in other cases we drop it.
If we do keep some measure for
janus-core, I'm also still inclined to give it some time to see the direction things move, but I'm not against swapping if anyone suggests a reliable alternative.Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions