Improve code quality by increasing code coverage: lib/source-map-from-file.js

[mcknasty]

Pull Request 453

commit ff5d39b73f2265105a8ecf1cc4b5fd9f47a570e2
Author: The Nasty [email protected]
Date: Tue Jan 16 14:00:38 2024 -0500

Improve code quality by increasing code coverage: lib/source-map-from-file.js (#453)

refactor:  lib/source-map-from-file.js to improve code coverage (#453)
refactor: exposed source-map-from-file.js function to write test cases (#453)
test: Added two test case cases to cover error handling for improper formatting (#453)

Following the Contributions Recommendations here.

1. Make sure you have installed the latest version of Node.js
2. Fork this project on GitHub and clone your fork locally
3. Create local branches to work within. These should also be created directly from the main branch. Local Fork here.
4. Make your changes.
5. Run tests to make sure all is okay (everything should pass except the snapshot).
   1. A complete log of initial test results.
   2. As instructed, ignore snapshot failures. 0 failures
   3. 101 passing in 1 minutes
6. Now update the snapshot.
   1. A complete log of snapshot test results.
   2. 101 passing in 1 minutes
7. If all is passing, commit your changes. The log of the commit can be found here.
8. As a best practice, once you have committed your changes, it is a good idea to use git rebase (not git merge) to synchronize your work with the main repository.
9. Run tests again to make sure all is okay.
   1. A complete log of the final test results.
   2. 101 passing in 49 seconds
10. Push
11. Open the pull request, see details in the template.
12. Make any necessary changes after review.

File Code Coverage Matrix Report

Test Type	File	Statement	Branch	Function	Lines	PASS
Final Test	lib/source-map-from-file.js	100%	93.33%	100%	100%	❌
Node 14.21.3	lib/source-map-from-file.js	100%	93.33%	100%	100%	❌
Node 16.20.2	lib/source-map-from-file.js	100%	93.33%	100%	100%	❌
Node 18.19.0	lib/source-map-from-file.js	100%	93.33%	100%	100%	❌
Node 20.11.0	lib/source-map-from-file.js	100%	93.33%	100%	100%	❌

Unit Tests Results

Test Type	PASS	Tests Passed	Tests Failed	Time
Initial Test	✔️	101 passing	0 failures	1 minutes
Snapshot Test	✔️	101 passing	0 failures	1 minutes
Final Test	✔️	101 passing	0 failures	49 seconds

• Tests conducted with Node v18.19.0

Node Version Testing Matrix

Node Version	PASS	Tests Passed	Tests Failed	Time
14.21.3	✔️	101 passing	0 failures	1 minutes
16.20.2	✔️	101 passing	0 failures	58 seconds
18.19.0	✔️	101 passing	0 failures	60 seconds
20.11.0	✔️	101 passing	0 failures	59 seconds

References #448

• Updated 2024-01-16 4:39 PM EST

[bcoe]

This is looking good to me, the one thing that seems a bit weird is the if (nodeMajorVersion === 12) because I don't think the logic that skips lines is smart enough to take if statements into account.

[bcoe]

This looks ready to land to me, apologies for ignoring for so long.

Mind rebasing?

[mcknasty]

@bcoe ready to go!

[mcknasty]

Completed another rebase after release.

[mcknasty]

Everything looks good except the tests on node 14. The CI process fails with the following error:

Run npm ci --engine-strict
npm ERR! Cannot read property '@bcoe/v8-coverage' of undefined

npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR!     /home/runner/.npm/_logs/202[4](https://github.com/bcoe/c8/actions/runs/7415825716/job/20179695732?pr=453#step:4:5)-01-04T23_0[7](https://github.com/bcoe/c8/actions/runs/7415825716/job/20179695732?pr=453#step:4:8)_00_[8](https://github.com/bcoe/c8/actions/runs/7415825716/job/20179695732?pr=453#step:4:9)93Z-debug.log
Error: Process completed with exit code 1.

If I run the same command locally on Node 14, I get the following:

❯ sh
$ node -v
v14.21.3
$ npm ci --engine-strict

added 384 packages, and audited 385 packages in 7s

99 packages are looking for funding
  run `npm fund` for details

found 0 vulnerabilities
$ uname -a
Linux XXXX-XXXXXX 5.15.133.1-microsoft-standard-WSL2 #1 SMP Thu Oct 5 21:02:42 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
$

I don't think this is anything on my end. @bcoe any ideas?

[mcknasty]

I am going to pull this back into draft mode. I noticed another module for spies that looks much easier to implement.