Code Coverage for ComputerInfoDebugView from #11863

[paul1956]

Part of Fixes in https://github.com/dotnet/winforms/pull/11863

Proposed changes

• Add Code Coverage for ComputerInfoDebugView

Customer Impact

• Improve Code Coverage for VB

Regression?

• No

Risk

• None, tests only

Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 75.58947%. Comparing base (b7c5bee) to head (0337cf4). Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##                main      #12315         +/-   ##
===================================================
+ Coverage   75.58551%   75.58947%   +0.00396%     
===================================================
  Files           3135        3136          +1     
  Lines         635987      635992          +5     
  Branches       47024       47023          -1     
===================================================
+ Hits          480714      480743         +29     
+ Misses        151811      151801         -10     
+ Partials        3462        3448         -14     

Flag	Coverage Δ
Debug	75.58947% <100.00000%> (+0.00396%)	:arrow_up:
integration	18.25377% <0.00000%> (+0.00881%)	:arrow_up:
production	49.12128% <100.00000%> (+0.00596%)	:arrow_up:
test	97.02909% <100.00000%> (+0.00202%)	:arrow_up:
unit	46.07650% <100.00000%> (-0.02283%)	:arrow_down:

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

[paul1956]

@lonitra I copied the platform exception from the ComputerInfoView and updated the exception testing for non Windows to be Fluent but that code is never hit.

Does this code (and the full version I copied from) ever run on a non Windows platform?

If it never does why is the "else" branch even there in both test files?

[lonitra]

Hm, I'm not aware of any test runs we have that run on a non Windows platform so I'm inclined to remove it. 🤔 Perhaps there is some historical context that @KlausLoeffelmann may know as to why that is there?

[paul1956]

Hm, I'm not aware of any test runs we have that run on a non Windows platform so I'm inclined to remove it. 🤔 Perhaps there is some historical context that @KlausLoeffelmann may know as to why that is there?

@KlausLoeffelmann @lonitra the Non Debug View has the same code, plus not Fluent. I can remove both, it would make coverage 100% vs very low now.

[lonitra]

Let's go ahead and remove it in tests since we do not test on non Windows

[paul1956]

Let's go ahead and remove it in tests since we do not test on non Windows

@lonitra it’s removed in my tests of ComputerInfoDebugView. It still exists in the tests for Computer Info, even if it does run on non windows platforms, the “if” is unnecessary because the excluded code should work everywhere.

[paul1956]

@lonitra what does untriaged mean?

I cleaned up ComputerInfoTests and made them Fluent

[lonitra]

what does untriaged mean?

This is only meant for issues, sometimes bot applies this after removing author feedback label for PRs that I have not been able to investigate yet..