On Thursday, February 14, 2019 at 5:48:41 PM UTC+1, Sergey Zhemzhitsky 
wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot for clarification.
>

BTW even if nice to see interest in JaCoCo for Scala, nevertheless IMO 
important to note/ask about alternatives - e.g. why not 
https://github.com/scoverage which seems to provide Gradle plugin?
 

> Would you mind if I add the corresponding pull request to support scala 
> filters then?
>

In any case of course you can open pull request!

However please be aware that

   - filters require clear detailed description and careful testing (unit 
   tests and so called "validation tests" that use real compiler, etc) - 
   please have a look at tickets linked from changelog entries about filtering
   - our knowledge of Scala is very limited ;)
   - as we don't have short-term plans to work on filters for Scala and 
   taking into account previous point, we can't guarantee that PR will be 
   immediately reviewed/merged
   
So maybe you can start from description here? And IMO the most interesting 
question - is there reliable unambiguous way to distinguish bytecode which 
can be produced by Scala compiler from bytecode which can be produced by 
Java/Kotlin/Groovy? e.g. Kotlin annotates its classes by "kotlin/Metadata", 
recent Groovy versions annotate methods by "Generated" - see similar 
discussions about Kotlin at 
https://github.com/jacoco/jacoco/issues/552#issuecomment-392611472 and 
about Groovy at 
https://github.com/jacoco/jacoco/pull/733#issuecomment-416176217

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"JaCoCo and EclEmma Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jacoco/763a8f3a-6511-4c96-9b40-314aed1d87f9%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to