Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Generate test coverage report #83

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Generate test coverage report #83

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

vthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@vthiery vthiery commented Dec 29, 2017

This is kind of a proposal actually. Running a mere coverage check on the main package, I found out it was pretty low and thought it'd be a good idea to have a coverage check run in the CI pipeline.

The script comes from codecov/example-go, and the coverage badge in the readme will work as soon as the account on codecov.io is ready.

Do you also think this make sense?

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@b633e22). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##             master     #83   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage          ?   59.3%           
========================================
  Files             ?       3           
  Lines             ?     376           
  Branches          ?       0           
========================================
  Hits              ?     223           
  Misses            ?     144           
  Partials          ?       9

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update b633e22...7dd6793. Read the comment docs.

@vthiery vthiery closed this Apr 29, 2019
chunter0 pushed a commit to chunter0/hey that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2024
chunter0 pushed a commit to chunter0/hey that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2024
We were not explicitly testing the behavior of some HTTP verb endpoints
like /put and /patch, because they currently share an underlying handler
with /post which is thoroughly tested.

The addition of the /anything endpoint in rakyll#83 made me realize a bit more
explicit test coverage would be good, so here we're landing a bit of a
refactoring of the test suite to generate tests for all of those
endpoints.

Along the way, we also improve compatibility with the original httpbin
implementation by tricking the stdlib net/http machinery into parsing
request bodies for DELETE requests.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants