Anyone in touch with codecov team ? We need assert(0); and assert(false); lines to be ignored

[Iain Buclaw]

On Thursday, 11 February 2021 at 11:17:29 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
> I see criticism comming, such as "they cannot handle 
> assert(/*yeah*/false/**/)", but I think that this does not 
> matter. The regexes for the two most common cases would be 
> great to get more accurate reports.

My first question would be whether they have this special case 
for C/C++ (such as __builtin_unreachable()).

There's nothing to prevent us rewriting the compiler/library code 
in such a way that it becomes covered.  But I'd have thought that 
coverage would be the least interesting part of the CI pipeline 
results.