-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
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
coverage: make coverage work for Node.js #23941
Conversation
CC: @nodejs/testing |
5e15383
to
b04d594
Compare
landed in 4df8c26 |
Force pushed out. No metadata, 'coverage' is not a valid subsystem. |
Commits were landed since the last CI run, so running CI again: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/18321/ |
(I'll re-land this once CI is good.) |
(Also: One more data point for a commit queue!!! People who land commits once in a while shouldn't have to remember/re-learn the process!) |
Big commit-queue fan here, but |
Landed in 616fac9 |
PR-URL: nodejs#23941 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <yangguo@chromium.org>
sorry about that, I used |
So I am thinking...what if we implement a |
Personally I'm not a big fan of the
|
I don't really like them either, but couldn't think of anything better :(
Sounds like a good idea to me, although what does NJILK mean? EDIT: oh, the PR ID? |
the PR_ID |
PR-URL: #23941 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <yangguo@chromium.org>
@bcoe do you think this is a candidate for backporting to |
This pull request gets coverage working for Node.js' own internal libraries, I've:
Checklist
make -j4 test
(UNIX), orvcbuild test
(Windows) passes