Partially revert naming changes introduced in 93689703c1:
CoverageModules -> FilteredModules
get_coverage_modules -> get_matching_modules
Having the name "coverage" meaning "filtered/selected modules" can be
confused with code coverage.
- Use `cover' with QuickCheck testing
- Reuse the `cover_*' rebar.config options
- Refactor cover-related code to separate module (`qc_cover_utils')
for use with both `eunit' and `qc'
REBAR will be set to the rebar binary which was executed and runs the
builds. Enables the use of the same binary for rebar invocations as
part of a pre or post hook like so:
${REBAR} escriptize
The combination of changes to rebar_erlc_compiler, and the fact
that erl_first_files is inherited, caused a regression. To fix
that, ensure every project uses its own .rebar/erlcinfo. While at
it, fix the issue that erl_first_files entries were not included
when initializing the dep digraph.
Reported-by: Louis-Philippe Gauthier
Reported-by: Roland Karlsson
Thanks: Tuncer Ayaz
When trying to skip spec files under deps/ directory,
ignore "deps" component which is also included in Cwd.
For example, "/home/deps/src/myapp/test/cover.spec"
contains "deps" component but should not be skipped if
Cwd is "/home/deps/src/myapp/".
Augment 'tests' option of 'rebar eunit' command with ability to specify
tests to run using module-qualified names. This change also forced me
to change the way modules for coverage and for testing itself are
selected - module-qualified tests specifications are now taken into
consideration. Extend tests to cover new functionality. Update
dialyzer_reference accordingly.
attempt to emulate the behavior of
`erl -pa ebin -pa deps/*/ebin`
fix error messages and formatting issues of `rebar shell` by
shutting down and restarting the user subsystem in a mode more
hospitable to the shell than the simple user started when run
as an escript. emulate `error_logger` behaviour when the shell
is run via `erl`
add documentation of the shell command
limitations:
the erlang interrupt handler is not enabled when running as an
escript and there is no interface to re-enable it via erlang code.
this means `ctrl-c` will immediately exit the running process
unlike when running the shell via `erl`. `ctrl-g` is, however,
unaffected
the user subsystem is killed and restarted but not supervised. if
your code somehow relies on the user subsystem crashing and
restarting `rebar shell` may interfere with it's operation
