You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
cargo tarpaulin -v mihai@galos 08/08/22 07:47:34
Aug 08 07:47:34.902 DEBUG cargo_tarpaulin: set up logging
Aug 08 07:47:34.902 INFO cargo_tarpaulin::config: Creating config
Aug 08 07:47:34.915 INFO cargo_tarpaulin: Running Tarpaulin
Aug 08 07:47:34.915 INFO cargo_tarpaulin: Building project
Aug 08 07:47:34.915 INFO cargo_tarpaulin::cargo: Cleaning project
Compiling foo v0.1.0 (/tmp/tmp.EpBqspzJZA/foo)
Running `rustc --crate-name foo --edition=2021 src/main.rs --error-format=json --json=diagnostic-rendered-ansi,artifacts,future-incompat --emit=dep-info,link -C embed-bitcode=no -C debuginfo=2 --test -C metadata=f6f74d0397cdf000 -C extra-filename=-f6f74d0397cdf000 --out-dir /tmp/tmp.EpBqspzJZA/foo/target/debug/deps -C incremental=/tmp/tmp.EpBqspzJZA/foo/target/debug/incremental -L dependency=/tmp/tmp.EpBqspzJZA/foo/target/debug/deps -C debuginfo=2 --cfg=tarpaulin -C link-dead-code`
Finished test [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.51s
Executable `/tmp/tmp.EpBqspzJZA/foo/target/debug/deps/foo-f6f74d0397cdf000`
Aug 08 07:47:35.478 INFO cargo_tarpaulin::process_handling::linux: Launching test
Aug 08 07:47:35.478 INFO cargo_tarpaulin::process_handling: running /tmp/tmp.EpBqspzJZA/foo/target/debug/deps/foo-f6f74d0397cdf000
running 5 tests
test tests::test_canonicalize_works_when_no_scheme ... ok
test tests::test_canonicalize_works_when_typical ... ok
test tests::test_scheme_works_when_no_port ... ok
test tests::test_scheme_works_when_no_scheme ... ok
test tests::test_scheme_works_when_typical ... ok
test result: ok. 5 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.00s
Aug 08 07:47:35.721 INFO cargo_tarpaulin::report: Coverage Results:
|| Uncovered Lines:
|| src/main.rs: 18
|| Tested/Total Lines:
|| src/main.rs: 34/35 +0.00%
||
97.14% coverage, 34/35 lines covered, +0% change in coverage
Expected behavior 100% coverage instead of 97.14% in the provided example.
Seems that line 19 (.scheme(input)) is not covered. I suspect the return None branch in line 12 for scheme() is at play.
I would expect the and_then + or_else to work as an if-else on the original value. Is this not the case?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sorry for replying so late. And they kinda do work the same the issue is more how instructions align with ptrace and the inherent issues in how unix decided to trace processes (a lot built around an assumption that everything is single threaded). Potentially --engine llvm may solve the accuracy issues - it does for a lot of people
Describe the bug
Using combinators (
and_then
,or_else
)), coverage seems to not report the initial line before the combinator.To Reproduce
Output:
Expected behavior
100%
coverage instead of97.14%
in the provided example.Seems that line 19 (
.scheme(input)
) is not covered. I suspect the returnNone
branch in line 12 forscheme()
is at play.I would expect the
and_then
+or_else
to work as an if-else on the original value. Is this not the case?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: