Greetings,
I am not very familiar with posting like this, my apologies ahead of time for anything wrong - heh.
Further
apologies if this has already been brought up; I feel I have looked
extensively, however was not able to find any existing references -
Please point me in the right direction if this has already been
addressed.
While trying to
incorporate PITest to an existing code-base using ant and junit-4.13.2, I
found this issue(?) that is easily reproduced with the
pitest-ant-example.
I have not found a solution yet, and would greatly appreciate any input to move forward.
["Hopefully" it is just something silly I have simply missed, and an easy fix]
Expected: PITest report with coverage above 0%.
Actual: PITest report with 0% coverage
Steps to reproduce:
- Move: junit-4.13.2.jar to lib/junit.4.13.2.jar
- Edit: build.xml @ L41 : junit-4.9.jar -> junit.4.13.2.jar
- Run: ant pit
- Load index.html and observe Line Coverage at 0%
Observations/Notes:
* Running the example out of the box without modification, reports Line Coverage at 84%
* Using junit.4.10 in the example project, also reports Line Coverage at 84%
* Using junit 4.11, 4.12, 4.13.2 in the example project, all report 0% as noted above
*
Modifying build.xml @ L9-11 to use PITest 1.9.3 jars downloaded from
Maven Central produces the same results as noted above for various junit
versions. [eg: Does not appear to resolve the issue]
-
*
Using the junit-4.9.jar from the example with our existing code-base,
junit/jacoco report is Green however PITest fails with the
requires-Green error.
* Using junit-4.10.jar from Maven Central with our existing code-base,
junit/jacoco report is Green however PITest fails with the requires-Green error. [Same as above]
*
Using junit-4.11, 4.12, or 4.13.2 with our existing code-base,
junit/jacoco report Green and PITest completes successfully, however as
noted above is reporting 0% Line Coverage.
* Notably, with
4.11 - 4.13.2, PITest report often includes the FooTest files in the
report as if they were source-files not test-files.
-
* While not sure if relevant, ant is 1.10.11 just for reference.
Please let me know if there is any additional information I can provide.
If anyone has any advice on how to proceed, I would be very appreciative for any input.
Thank you,
~Badger