3 ms·

> We'll need to work together on challenges like tooling If you wonder what is meant by that, I think I know of an example. They have done this (quite unusual)

by est31 7y ago

> We'll need to work together on challenges like tooling If you wonder what is meant by that, I think I know of an example. They have done this (quite unusual) choice to not include a Cargo.lock into their project because it gives a bad developer experience on merge conflicts [1]. They'd love to have a merge tool for the purpose, see more in [2]. [1]: https://github.com/libra/libra/issues/52 https://github.com/libra/libra/issues/52 [2]: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/1818 https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/1818

qznc 7y ago
Can cargo report the test coverage yet?
- Arnavion 7y ago
  https://github.com/mozilla/grcov https://github.com/mozilla/grcov though it requires a nightly rustc for now since it uses some unstable RUSTFLAGS.
  - qznc 7y ago
    That is an improvement since the last time I looked. Thanks! My ideal would be "cargo test --coverage=report/".
Jaxan 7y ago
Thanks for linking to the repo. I just had a look. It's impressive how many github users want to be funny and make bullshit pull requests and nonsense issues. What is the point of doing all that :-(?