Disagreement about coverage percentage about simplecov-html

[colszowka]

Thanks, I've noticed this as well. The command line output wrongly takes the coverage percent from the current result, while the MergedResult from all test suites should be used here.

[benhamill]

Hmm. In the project I was seeing this with, I only have rspec running (so far), so the merged and current should be the same, no?

[colszowka]

Hmm, good point :)

[cap10morgan]

I had to commit a patch to simplecov-rcov to make its reported coverage match simplecov-html's. Here's the diff: fguillen/simplecov-rcov@f42eb8e...466446a

I just copied that code straight out of simplecov-html. It seems like this code should be moved up into simplecov, since ideally all formatters would be able to use the same coverage percentage calculation. Then you could just put an accessor on the return results object for the formatter to call.

I can do the work and issue pull requests if you agree with this approach. (Sorry if this thread is about a separate issue, but it seemed like the two problems might be related.)

[colszowka]

So the covered_percent method in the Result class was completely broken, see Issue #19 in simplecov.

This is fixed with 0.4.4, so the reported coverage should be accurate on the command line as well.

The reason this worked in the html formatter is that it uses it's own facilities to calculate coverage since it has to do this for groups individually, while the Result#covered_percent method only works on the whole result set.

As @cap10morgan pointed out correctly, these facilities should be unified and made available in the result class, accepting an array of source files that should be taken into account.

If you want to take a shot on this, go ahead, pull requests are warmly welcomed :)

[cap10morgan]

OK, I'll take a crack at it and issue a pull request when I have something working.

[cap10morgan]

Sorry for the delay on this, I should have something ready to pull shortly.

[cap10morgan]

OK, pull request issued. Let me know if I got the concept right or if you have any issues w/ the implementation.