Has someone encountered similar issues with -cov?

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 1 July 2016 at 18:15:56 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
> Yah it's a bit subtle. That line is in fact pure punctuation, 
> so even though there's no flow through it that's totally fine 
> (as much as you wouldn't expect a line with a "}" to show no 
> coverage). -- Andrei

Not sure if it's pure punctuation. It is after all a statement 
checking for a condition, i.e. actually doing something. The fact 
that you bypass this check should not concern -cov, whose job it 
is to see whether a task is executed or not. You cannot expect 
-cov to do the optimizer's job on top of that. In fact one could 
argue that it shouldn't make assumptions.