SCAN4NET-80 Coverage Exclusions: Apply more granular approach #2196
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
terraform-techuser
changed the title
| return coveragePaths.Where(x => x is not null).ToArray(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private static string CoveragePaths(List<Property> localProperties, IDictionary<string, string> serverProperties, string propertyName) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the main difference.
We take into account local and server settings on an individual property level.
This will help when we implement the directory exclusion for dotCover.
gregory-paidis-sonarsource
requested a review
from costin-zaharia-sonarsource
costin-zaharia-sonarsource
requested changes
Sep 17, 2024
Tests/SonarScanner.MSBuild.PreProcessor.Test/AnalysisConfigGeneratorTests.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tests/SonarScanner.MSBuild.PreProcessor.Test/AnalysisConfigGeneratorTests.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tests/SonarScanner.MSBuild.PreProcessor.Test/AnalysisConfigGeneratorTests.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| // The idea is that we are manually adding the coverage paths to the exclusions, so that they do not appear on the analysis. | ||
| private static void HandleCoverageExclusions(AnalysisConfig config, ProcessedArgs localSettings, IDictionary<string, string> serverProperties) | ||
| private static class CoverageExclusions |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like that it's a class now. What do you think about:
- extracting it outside of the parent class
- move it to another file
- rename it to coverage exclusions processor and make it an instance type instead of static
- passing it to the constructor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I prefer to leave it private in here, mainly for the following reasons:
- This class is tightly coupled with how we generate the AnalysisConfig
- The test scaffolding needed is more or less the same for
GenerateFileandUpdateConfig
costin-zaharia-sonarsource
approved these changes
Sep 17, 2024
Tests/SonarScanner.MSBuild.PreProcessor.Test/AnalysisConfigGeneratorTests.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tests/SonarScanner.MSBuild.PreProcessor.Test/AnalysisConfigGeneratorTests.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
gregory-paidis-sonarsource
deleted the
greg/coverage-exclusions-granularity
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
SCAN4NET-80
This PR is mostly a cleanup, to help with implementing the next one soon.
It also adds a more granular approach on which coverage paths to use, as before it was an all-or-nothing approach between local and server-side settings.