[TIP] After upgrade to coverage 3.0.1, nosetests --with-coverage shows zero lines covered!

[Ned Batchelder]

I've finally checked in a fix for this problem.  It's a long story, and 
I can share the details if you really want, but it boils down to a 
module that TurboGears uses called DecoratorTools.  This module is too 
clever by half, and ends up trashing the trace function that coverage 
needs to measure the code. 

The fix involves a new mode for coverage.py, enabled with the --timid 
switch, which makes coverage use a simpler and slower trace function.  
This trace function isn't clobbered by DecoratorTools, so the code is 
properly measured.  For use with nosetests, you can set an environment 
variable COVERAGE_OPTIONS to --timid also.

I haven't cut a new release yet, but you can use the tip of coverage.py 
(http://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/downloads/) for now.

--Ned.
http://nedbatchelder.com

Doug Latornell wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestions, Ned.  I confirmed that the problem exists 
> in a minimal TG 1.0.5 project:
>
> alec:coverage-test$ tg-admin quickstart spam
> ...
> alec:coverage-test$ cd spam/
> alec:spam$ nosetests --with-coverage --cover-package=spam --cover-erase
> ..
> Name               Stmts   Exec  Cover   Missing
> ------------------------------------------------
> spam                   1      1   100%
> spam.config            1      1   100%
> spam.controllers       7      0     0%   1-13
> spam.templates         1      1   100%
> ------------------------------------------------
> TOTAL                 10      3    30%
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ran 2 tests in 1.492s
>
> OK
> alec:spam$ sudo easy_install "coverage==2.85"
> ...
> alec:spam$ nosetests --with-coverage --cover-package=spam --cover-erase
> ..
> Name               Stmts   Exec  Cover   Missing
> ------------------------------------------------
> spam                   0      0   100%
> spam.config            0      0   100%
> spam.controllers       7      7   100%
> spam.templates         0      0   100%
> ------------------------------------------------
> TOTAL                  7      7   100%
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ran 2 tests in 9.206s
>
> OK
>
> Next, I'll try your -L option suggestion, and the logging from tip.
>
> Re: -L is there a way to pass a switch to coverage through the nose 
> plug-in?  AFAIK, the TG quickstart project template relies on nose for 
> test discovery.  The test module has nothing like a unittest.main() 
> interface.
>
> Doug
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Ned Batchelder <ned at nedbatchelder.com 
> <mailto:ned at nedbatchelder.com>> wrote:
>
>     Doug, thanks for reporting this.  If you don't get a toy TG
>     project working, here are two things to try:
>
>  
> ...
>  
>
>
>     --Ned.
>     http://nedbatchelder.com
>
>

-- 
Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.idyll.org/pipermail/testing-in-python/attachments/20090809/7975ee0b/attachment.html