Recent changes to feature-requests

JUnit 4 support

2006-11-30T00:21:43Z

As per forum topic https://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=1568510&forum_id=472861 please could you add some support for JUnit 4 tests.

Add AspectJ support

2006-10-12T19:53:32Z

AspectJ produces Java bytecode that can be further
instrumented by Coverlipse. Both original code (the
canvas) and woven in code (the thread, at least in
no-inline mode) can be tracked back to original source
lines. Because of that Coverlipse could be used to
effectively assess test coverage of code woven by AspectJ.

To make this happen integration between Coverlispe and
AJC / AJDT needs to be improved in the following areas:

- correct instrumentiation of all idioms introduced
into the bytecode by AJC
- correct evaluation of coverage both in the methods in
the woven classes and in the aspects
- assignment of coverage markers to aspect source files
- navigation from Coverlipse views to aspects
(including aspects nested in classes and vice versa)

Progress of this feature implementation will be tracked
in this issue.

Decrease percentage of coverage for green tick

2006-08-01T11:44:41Z

Hi,

currently 100% coverage is needed for the yellow bang
to turn into a green tick in Class View.

But there are in my opinion perfect valid cases for
unrechable code like a default-clause in a switch-case
statement to catch future enhancements.

Please decrease this percentage to 80% or make it
configureable.

Thanks

Struts Tests support

2005-12-17T02:20:34Z

Add the support of tests which by using
CactusStrutsTestCase.

PDE JUnit Plug-in Test support

2005-12-07T20:48:48Z

The ability to run JUnit Plug-in tests would be very
useful for detecting code coverage in my abbot.swt GUI
tests and test framework.

This would involve at the very least providing the same
tabs that the current JUnit Plug-in tests support, such
as Plugins, Main, etc.

Allow to check classes that are done testing

2005-10-13T20:27:08Z

It would be great if there were a way to mark
individual methods for exclusion -- for example, if I
have a class with a lot of simple getter/setter methods
that just wrap private instance variables, I don't
really care if I have 100% coverage of them since I
know they're going to be bug-free unless the Java
compiler is buggy. But right now Coverlipse treats them
as uncovered code and drops my coverage percentages
down low, even if my test actually does cover all the
code in the class that does real work.

Java 5 annotations seem like a natural fit. Or maybe a
static String[] that contains a list of "don't care"
methods.

Improve Usability of class view

2005-10-13T12:33:25Z

- Add percentage filter
- For both percentage and name filter, enable inversion.
- Allow combination of various filters.
- Add checkbox for inverse sorting

Improve Package Filters

2005-10-13T12:25:59Z

1. Don't filter on package names but on class names
that consist of package.ClassName.

2. Make it possible to add packages to the system
classloader via GUI.

introduce classloader safe mode

2005-10-02T06:51:56Z

maybe this can be done by making Coverlipse an
incremental compiler. As such one, it can weave in its
callbacks, write the .class file to the disk . When
running the test, the .class file can be loaded and
executed by whatever classloader wants to.

Show classes not covered

2005-09-27T13:50:50Z

The current Coverlipse Class Viewer does not list
classes not covered during testing, though this is one
of the most interesting things to know about a
testsuite. It would be helpfull to included all
packages and classes within selected projects, so that
it is easy to find not covered classes.