I arrived to a legacy project where multiple files are developed in Java and many others in Kotlin. I have be able to configure Pitest to execute the mutation test and i have a correct report.
Now I would like to execute the mutation test only over the Kotlin files.
I tried to use the <targetClasses> but the param expresion is able to include certain packages, but I didn't discover a way to include certain types of files only.
I also tried to use the <excludedClasses> to add there a Java identificator that exclude this type of files, but again it doesn't work.
Do you know a way to use the targetClasses or the excludedClasses to let the kotlin files only in the scope of the Pitest execution?
Thank you in advance.
There is no built in way to limit mutation to only kotlin files. You would need to implement an mutation interceptor.
https://pitest.org/quickstart/advanced/
Or use the exclusions functionality provided by the arcmutate extentions to ignore files with a .java extension.
https://docs.arcmutate.com/docs/exclusions.html
Motivation:
In our code we have a few places where some methods are run by their name. There are some big if-else-if blocks with each function name and call of the corresponding method (I use the term function to describe just names, for example function X01 might correspond to method SomeClass.functionX01). I've been looking into ways to improve that
Goal:
Write just methods that are annotated with some custom annotation, removing the need to update or even include if-else-if blocks in order to run specific function. Have access to any generated code if any code is generated.
What I did:
I've created first prove of concept using runtime annotations and it proved successful, but slower then if-else-if. Next attempt was with source annotation
I've followed this link for an example, however it did not seam to run in IntelliJ. What I wanted is to have - in this case PersonBuilder class generated, instead there was none. In some cases an error was raised Error:java: Bad service configuration file, or exception thrown while constructing Processor object: javax.annotation.processing.Processor: Provider BuilderProcessor not found
After some Googling and failing to find anything I've turned to book (Core Java, Volume II - Advanced Features - 9th Edition, Polish translation) and there was reccomended to run the following commands:
javac [AbstractProcessor implementation]
javac -processor [Compiled Processor] [other source files to compile]
This worked, however is unsatisfactory as it needs to happen inside IDE (NetBeans and IntelliJ to be specific) automatically during build. Code does not need to be generated on the fly, but programmer must have access to it after build (as in - be able to call methods of generated classes)
Question:
How to have and use generated code used in NetBeans and IntelliJ without the need of using external tools? Is it possible, or using reflection, runtime annotations or external tools is the only way?
Additional info (just in case):
Language level: Java 1.8
JVM versions: 12 and 13
IDEs: NetBeans and IntelliJ
I am trying to integrate Clover with a Java project at work. Clover has been added to the classpath, the plugin has been added to the POM and the license has been set up.
When I run mvn clean clover:setup test clover:aggregate clover:clover Clover starts up correctly. However, tests that generate csv's fail because the CSV output is not what is expected. This is what gets generated for one of the tests:
<ID,NAME,[__CLR4_1_2_TEST_NAME_SNIFFER,"DESCRIPTION,Long","DESCRIPTION,Short",country
001,Fred,com_atlassian_clover.TestNameSniffer$1#e628ccb,Mr. Fred Flinstone,Fred Flinstone,US
002,Bob,com_atlassian_clover.TestNameSniffer$1#e628ccb,Mr. Bob the builder,Bob the builder,UK
003,Tintin,com_atlassian_clover.TestNameSniffer$1#e628ccb,Mr. Tin Tin,Tin Tin,FR
004,,com_atlassian_clover.TestNameSniffer$1#e628ccb,,Rob the Bob,
005,,com_atlassian_clover.TestNameSniffer$1#e628ccb],,Tom the Bob,
>
This is what is expected:
<ID,NAME,["DESCRIPTION,Long","DESCRIPTION,Short",country
001,Fred,Mr. Fred Flinstone,Fred Flinstone,US
002,Bob,Mr. Bob the builder,Bob the builder,UK
003,Tintin,Mr. Tin Tin,Tin Tin,FR
004,,,Rob the Bob,
005,],,Tom the Bob,
Why would Clover add a new column in to the CSV output, is it possible to stop it? I'm using maven 3.3, JDK 8 and Clover version 4.0.2.
I have tried looking for an answer but cannot seem to find anything similar to this issue. When I remove the failing tests Clover works fine.
I'm pretty sure it's connected to the code (or a library) you're using to create that CSV file. Clover on its own won't modify a CSV file. I suppose there's a code which access Java Object fields by reflection. Since class is instrumented by Clover, it adds some instrumentation code (like CLV_TEST_SNIFFER.
There are basically two solutions to your problem:
Modify the code which dumps classes to CSV to exclude static class members (this will effectively exclude Clover objects). Anyway, I believe it's not desired to dump static members to CSV which, as I assume, is a data projection of your Java object (static members don't belong to object but to class). Though, I don't know your full use case, so I may be simply wrong.
You can simply exclude files which cause problems (the ones which are serialised to CSV?) from Clover instrumentation, effectively you'll loose coverage data for those classes.
I've recently discovered Error Prone and am integrating it into my Android build using the Gradle plugin linked on their page.
Since our project is using Icepick (and some other code generating annotation processors), we have generated source code, which gets compiled in. Unfortunately, some of the generated code triggers warnings in Error Prone, and I'd like to filter that noise out somehow.
The generated code shows up in the app/build/generated/source/apt/debug directory. How can I exempt this code from Error Prone's steely gaze?
Use the flag -XepDisableWarningsInGeneratedCode
See this issue on GitHub
In my case classes were annotated with #AvroGenerated and -XepDisableWarningsInGeneratedCode didn't work.
The solution was to exclude build directory from checks via -XepExcludedPaths:.*/build/.*
I current migrate to JaCoCo. In my old system there was one line per source file.
In the code coverage report that I receive from JaCoCo there are a large count of anonymous classes. Is it possible to summarize the result from anonymous classes to its parent class?
I use the current version 0.7.1.
I want one line per source file in the code coverage report.