From a4bca1f1c7086089f51be6bebf7dc3c5bb2761b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michael Davis Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 13:24:10 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] wording changes and add ignores section in readme --- README.md | 19 ++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 71fa6512..774b254d 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ A fork of [ExCoveralls](https://github.com/parroty/excoveralls) focusing on the ## The 100% Coverage Use-Case Shooting for 100% coverage is usually criticized as unnecessary and -unproductive, and I tend to agree with that sentiment. But as far as measuring +unproductive, and we tend to agree with that sentiment. But as far as measuring code coverage in percentage points goes, 100% is the only reasonable target: any other percent-based target flaps around when SLOCs are added or removed. @@ -78,9 +78,26 @@ config :chaps, For the full schema, see the documentation of the `Chaps.Settings` module. +## Using ignores + +Ignores in chaps are just about the same as they are in ExCoveralls: + +```elixir +# this piece of code is so hard to get meaningful coverage on that it's +# not worth our time, let's skip it + +# chaps-ignore-start +def really_hard_to_get_coverage(args) do + # .. +end +# chaps-ignore-stop +``` + ## Differences from `parroty/excoveralls` - Coverage is truncated to the tenths place instead of rounded + - this enforces that for even very large projects, 100% coverage means + **all** SLOCs are covered, not just approximately all SLOCs - Tasks and dependencies for uploading coverage reports have been removed - the `:hackney` dependency has been removed - Configuration is done in `config/test.exs` instead of a JSON file