@hansl @jelbourn - I've done TypeScript coverage using remap-istanbul on a few projects but the implementation has always been very project specific.

It is also worth noting that nyc is also actively working to support TypeScript coverage.

My question is .. Do we want to do this in two parts?

Phase 1: Simple implementation of karma-coverage outputting to the command line when running "npm test"

This I could PR right now, karma doesn't exactly make coverage reporting hard :)
There is also a feature in remap-istanbul#master related to relative paths I would need to make it work.

Phase 2: Tailored, more complex implementation using remap-istanbul for dev TS coverage which also reports coverage in CI to a 3rd Party service && comments on the pull request. There are a few offerings (mentioned above) that are getting close on TypeScript coverage, perhaps the prudent path forward is the patient one.

While I personally think reporting coverage based on the transpiled javascript should be taken with a grain of salt ( branches in particular ) it does show you where most of the holes are. While it's not something I would keep for historical purposes, I do believe there is a short term benefit for code quality.

Uh oh!

Collect code coverage #128

Description

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions