- Use jacoco for Java-side coverage. Our Java coverage is /terrible
(~10%), as we only really test the core libraries. Still a good thing
to track for regressions though.
- mcfly now tracks Lua side coverage. This works in several stages:
- Replace loadfile to include the whole path
- Add a debug hook which just tracks filename->(lines->count). This
is then submitted to the Java test runner.
- On test completion, we emit a luacov.report.out file.
As the debug hook is inserted by mcfly, this does not include any
computer startup (such as loading apis, or the root of bios.lua),
despite they're executed.
This would be possible to do (for instance, inject a custom header
into bios.lua). However, we're not actually testing any of the
behaviour of startup (aside from "does it not crash"), so I'm not
sure whether to include it or not. Something I'll most likely
re-evaluate.
This adds documentation comments to many of CC's Lua APIs, and
a couple of the Java ones, through the use of stubs. We then
export these to HTML using illuaminate [1] and upload them to our
documentation site [2].
Uploads currently occur on pushes to master and any release/tag. The
site is entirely static - there is no way to switch between versions,
etc... but hopefully we can improve this in the future.
[1]: github.com/SquidDev/illuaminate/
[2]: https://tweaked.cc/
We now use illuaminate[1]'s linting facilities to check the rom and
bios.lua for a couple of common bugs and other problems.
Right now this doesn't detect any especially important bugs, though it
has caught lots of small things (unused variables, some noisy code). In
the future, the linter will grow in scope and features, which should
allow us to be stricter and catch most issues.
As a fun aside, we started off with ~150 bugs, and illuaminate was able
to fix all but 30 of them, which is pretty neat.
[1]: https://github.com/SquidDev/illuaminate
- Add a link to discord and the forums. Oh goodness, I hope this
doesn't count as making things official.
I've had a couple of people email me with support requests, which is
/fine/, but there's better channels for it!
- Add a couple of PR templates
- Ask people to write tests for CraftOS changes. This is a standard
I'm trying to impose on myself, so seems reasonable to impose on
everyone. Sorry!
- Require same levels of explanation for PRs as we do for issues.
- Try to expand on the feature request "rationale" section a little.
Just trying to explan my process a little bit more.
I'm not entirely a fan of massive templates, but there's
been a couple of lacklustre issues recently, so it's probably
good to formalise my guidelines.
