[TIP] Conditional code coverage

[André Caron]

@Chris: yeah, like I said in my original post, that's the ideal approach.
I've worked with this technique using coveralls.io before and I really like
it.  Problem is I'm currently running on some corporate build
infrastructure (not my call) that's really slow to change and I won't be
able to get that quickly enough.  Was looking for some other ideas as a
temporary work around to buy some time.

André

On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Ned Batchelder <ned at nedbatchelder.com>
wrote:

> This is definitely the most common approach.  Some people want to see that
> they have complete coverage on each platform independently, though I have
> never tried that myself.  André indicated he could not use combine for
> whatever reason, not sure why.
>
> --Ned.
>
> On 8/2/16 6:27 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
>
> When I hit this, I just ran the tests on the various platforms and used
> "coverage conbine" to get them into one place before making assertions.
>
> cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> On 27/07/2016 18:56, André Caron wrote:
>
> Neat!  Looks like a winner, at least until I have more than 2 platforms
> (this mechanism being based on exclusion, I have to "negate" the platform,
> which may yield multiple results).
>
> André
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Ned Batchelder <ned at nedbatchelder.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You can use environment variables in the .coveragerc file, so you can
>> create a pattern for pragmas that uses environmental data.  For example:
>> https://github.com/habnabit/ebb-lint/blob/master/.coveragerc :
>>
>> [report]
>> exclude_lines =
>>     pragma: no ${TOX_ENVNAME}
>>     pragma: no ?cover
>>
>> --Ned.
>>
>>
>> On 7/26/16 6:33 PM, André Caron wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have some code base that has platform-specific code, mostly related to
>> how to handle SIGINT and CTRL-C for which I like to use `coverage report
>> --fail-under=100`.  Problem is that some code only runs on one OS, so
>> coverage is always partial in those cases and it's not so straightforward.
>>
>> I've used Coveralls for some open source projects and their solution
>> AFAICT seems to be to collect the `.coverage` files in a central location
>> and then combine the coverage files, after which you can run the actual
>> reporting.
>>
>> However, I'm not in a position to use Coveralls for this project and
>> integrating a distributed coverage combine is not viable in the
>> short/medium term.
>>
>> I'm looking for suggestions on a quick and dirty way to solve this.
>>
>> One thing I thought of was using coverage's `exclude_lines` option [1]
>> with a platform specific token to get this:
>>
>> if sys.platform == 'win32':  # pragma: cover win32
>>
>>
>> I guess this works, but it requires that I have a platform-specific
>> configuration file (e.g. via duplicatation or generation from a template).
>>
>> Anybody have any better ideas?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> André
>>
>> [1]:
>> https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/coverage-4.1/excluding.html#advanced-exclusion
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> testing-in-python mailing listtesting-in-python at lists.idyll.orghttp://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/testing-in-python
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> testing-in-python mailing list
>> testing-in-python at lists.idyll.org
>> http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/testing-in-python
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> testing-in-python mailing listtesting-in-python at lists.idyll.orghttp://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/testing-in-python
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.idyll.org/pipermail/testing-in-python/attachments/20160802/bf63654a/attachment-0001.htm>