[Issue 14855] -cov should ignore assert(0)

[via Digitalmars-d-bugs]

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14855

Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at gdcproject.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ibuclaw at gdcproject.org

--- Comment #6 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at gdcproject.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan M Davis from comment #5)
> > Maybe we can add a compiler flag or API in Druntime to change the behavior based on a user's opinion?
> 
> Much as I would love to see assert(0) not counted towards the coverage, I
> think that we should avoid extra compiler flags for stuff like this, and
> Walter is generally opposed to adding compiler flags without a really good
> reason, so I'd be pretty shocked if he'd agree to one for this. If he were
> convinced that it mattered enough to consider it, he'd just agree to change
> the normal behavior.
> 
> At this point, expect that the options are:
> 
> 1. Just put up with how things are and fail to get 100% code coverage in a
> number of cases because of this issue.
> 

I'd say just put up with it.  Code that we *know* is unreachable can only be
considered good if it's never hit. :-)

There are always ways to refactor code so that you get 100% hit without
compromising code correctness.  Such as using enforce + final switch.


> 3. Use a different code coverage tool. I don't know how possible that would
> be with dmd, but it should work with gdc or ldc.
>

Different coverage tools would still have the same outcome though.

--