-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 112
[DNM] 🧪 Instrument C-extensions to collect coverage #1228
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
I expect a far from 100% coverage because of CPython API calls error checking. |
5ea38c2 to
453481f
Compare
| log.info('Copying tracing data into the build directory') | ||
| tracing_data_file_in_tmp_dir = self._ext_tracing_file_for(ext) | ||
| tracing_data_in_package_dir = self._ext_tracing_data_dir_map[ext.name] | ||
| tracing_data_file_in_package_dir = tracing_data_in_package_dir / tracing_data_file_in_tmp_dir |
Check notice
Code scanning / CodeQL
Unused local variable Note
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #1228 will improve performances by 12.2%Comparing Summary
Benchmarks breakdown
|
0bc563e to
8bea87b
Compare
What do these changes do?
This patch sets up the infrastructure for collecting and reporting coverage for C-extensions. It includes updates to packaging, test runner and CI/CD.
Warning
THE PATCH IS INCOMPLETE. THIS IS @webknjaz's PLAYGROUND FOR NOW. DO NOT MERGE!
I've been able to generate coverage reports locally, with a series of manual commands. They still need to be integrated and cleaned up to fit well together.
Are there changes in behavior for the user?
This is a contributor-facing change, allowing them to expose gaps in coverage of C-extensions.
Related issue number
N/A
Checklist