Théo FIDRY

@sanmai it's not only about the coverage reports (so far even supporting PHPUnit 5.x is still ok), but _also_ the test framework instrumentation which includes: - retrieving the version -...

Hm at least for the case at hand I preferred to keep it at the mutator level: it was a pretty specific case. But either way, you may end up...

We would also probably need a finer control: ```php // disable all on the next node /** @infection-disable GreaterThan */ while ($a > $b) { // ... // won't be...

I've been thinking the same since we started to profile more regularly: executing the processes seriously skews the results. Generally the more I/O and network we have the less the...

> It is somewhat like calling a doorknob a handle-you-pull-to-open-a-door. Still better than calling it a pullable-door :P I'm happy to take another name. Keep in mind that though that...

>That's a lot of changes here. I wish I could review functional changes separately from name changes. I wanted that as well, but I also needed the final state to...

Update as per @sanmai comments, this PR has changed. You can see it with the following rationale: `Mutant` = `Mutation` + some calculated state, but since at no point we...

>I'm afraid I don't understand this renaming. Every resource about mutation testing have a definition of Mutant, which is now just removed. Because there it implies an applied changed or...

Maybe let's put the problem another way: I don't think the current distinction between `Mutation` & `Mutant` _in infection_ has any sense (code-wise) and compares to the more general purpose...

@sanmai @maks-rafalko I've updated the description as an attempt to better express myself and address some of the concerns mentioned. If there is any specific piece (e.g. @maks-rafalko you mentioned...