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

Type check coverage reports need more love #1123

Open
gvanrossum opened this issue Jan 13, 2016 · 5 comments
Open

Type check coverage reports need more love #1123

gvanrossum opened this issue Jan 13, 2016 · 5 comments
Labels
bug mypy got something wrong priority-1-normal

Comments

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

The report generating code (using command-line flags like --html-report dir or --xml-report dir) has some issues.

@JukkaL JukkaL added the bug mypy got something wrong label Jan 13, 2016
@ddfisher ddfisher added this to the 0.4.0 milestone Mar 1, 2016
@gvanrossum gvanrossum removed this from the 0.5 milestone Mar 29, 2017
@ilinum ilinum self-assigned this Jun 30, 2017
@mthuurne
Copy link
Contributor

Another issue with the reports is that they are incomplete when there is cached information. I have to remove the .mypy_cache directory to get a full report, otherwise modules that have been checked before are omitted from the report.

@JukkaL
Copy link
Collaborator

JukkaL commented Nov 23, 2018

@mthuurne That would be easy to fix by disabling incremental mode when generating reports.

@mthuurne
Copy link
Contributor

Indeed adding --no-incremental helps. Would it be useful to automatically disable incremental mode when a report is requested? I would be willing to write a patch for that.

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member Author

@mthuurne If you submit a patch for that it would fix #5103. It would be very welcome!

@mthuurne
Copy link
Contributor

See pull request #6076 for patch.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug mypy got something wrong priority-1-normal
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants