Martin Hare Robertson

Filtering by annotations would not be sufficient for my needs as AFAIK annotations can't be added to arbitrary lines of Java source code - only to class/method/field/variable declarations. I agree...

I should add a couple of things: 1) Coverage exclusions is the single missing feature which prevents JaCoCo from being really useful for me so I'm keen to see this...

I've made a start looking at the JaCoCo code. Here are my current notes about what needs to be changed to resolve this bug. It would be great to get...

Thanks for the feedback. Addressing your concerns in turn: 1) This is a fair concern and a good argument for doing analysis-time filtering. 2) I'm not imagining that there will...

Hmmm. System.setProperty won't be suitable as the underlying property is stored in a HashTable which has a synchronized put method. I really just need a convenient bytecode no-op that won't...

That's useful context. Presumably not all of those ideas have been implemented? I see that one of the ideas is to have a comment based mechanism for turning off coverage....

I've had a go at coming up with an interface which can be used to define these filters. You can see my changes here: https://github.com/mchr3k/jacoco/commit/0b26b29dd3c7f82a00a2ddda05a20d57a4e154a2 The key approach is to...

My current proposed changes uses ``` Runtime.getRuntime().equals("jacoco.off") ``` as a mechanism to turn on/off code coverage. I have chosen this as a relatively concise distinctive line of code which will...

I'm inclined to agree that useless method calls are a rubbish way of doing this. However, annotations aren't good enough as it is very restrictive where you can place them....

@johnduffell it sounds like we are in total agreement about the benefits of inline comment based coverage exclusions. As soon as I hear from @marchof about whether this approach will...