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

Include the source line-number per request entry call in JSON report #2273

Closed
lambrospetrou opened this issue Dec 29, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2284
Closed

Include the source line-number per request entry call in JSON report #2273

lambrospetrou opened this issue Dec 29, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2284
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Milestone

Comments

@lambrospetrou
Copy link

lambrospetrou commented Dec 29, 2023

Problem to solve

The HTML report (run.html) includes the reference to the filename and line number per request entry call (see code).

I would like to have that information in the JSON report as well, so that I can use the JSON report as the single source of results, instead of having to parse the HTML report for certain things like this, as I do now (see webscripts tool).

Proposal

Extend the JSON report (see code) to include the line numbers for each request call, instead of only providing the filename.

@lambrospetrou lambrospetrou added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 29, 2023
@jcamiel jcamiel linked a pull request Jan 4, 2024 that will close this issue
@jcamiel jcamiel added this to the 4.2.0 milestone Jan 4, 2024
@jcamiel
Copy link
Collaborator

jcamiel commented Jan 4, 2024

Hi @lambrospetrou this will be part of the next Hurl release (4.2.0).
I've added a line field on the "entry" level (the parent node of a call): the entry already has the index and the call node is more about runtime - an entry can have multiple calls with retry or redirect - (it was also simpler to implement). If it's ok for you, it's good!

@lambrospetrou
Copy link
Author

The current report (-run.html) shows it for each call at the moment.
I guess having it at the entry level still makes sense though, since all the calls in the entry will be about the same line in the actual source, so it should be fine.

Thanks a lot for adding this 🙏

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants