<?xml version="1.0"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/rss.xsl"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>reportgenerator Issue Tracker Rss Feed</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/list/basic</link><description>reportgenerator Issue Tracker Rss Description</description><item><title>Commented Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9988</link><description>For a class which consists of only automatic get&amp;#59; set&amp;#59; properties, the coverage statistics show 0 covered and 0 uncovered of a possible 0 giving coverage of 0&amp;#37;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Since there&amp;#39;s no code there to test, it would be nice if 0 of 0 was interpreted as 100&amp;#37; rather than 0&amp;#37;, so the coverage bar could be green instead of red.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: marklam ** &lt;p&gt;0 of 0 now showing as an empty bar for both cases. &lt;br&gt;Thanks for the fix.&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>marklam</author><pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 09:31:07 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988] 20130403093107A</guid></item><item><title>Closed Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9988</link><description>For a class which consists of only automatic get&amp;#59; set&amp;#59; properties, the coverage statistics show 0 covered and 0 uncovered of a possible 0 giving coverage of 0&amp;#37;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Since there&amp;#39;s no code there to test, it would be nice if 0 of 0 was interpreted as 100&amp;#37; rather than 0&amp;#37;, so the coverage bar could be green instead of red.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: Fixed in changeset 72396.&lt;br /&gt;Please update to ReportGenerator 1.8.1.0</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:57:54 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Closed Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988] 20130402065754P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9988</link><description>For a class which consists of only automatic get&amp;#59; set&amp;#59; properties, the coverage statistics show 0 covered and 0 uncovered of a possible 0 giving coverage of 0&amp;#37;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Since there&amp;#39;s no code there to test, it would be nice if 0 of 0 was interpreted as 100&amp;#37; rather than 0&amp;#37;, so the coverage bar could be green instead of red.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: marklam ** &lt;p&gt;Hi Daniel, yes it was version 1.8.0.0&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've attached a repro case including the coverage file (in the OpenCover subfolder). It wasn't a class containing only atuto-properties after all - it was an empty class, but I noticed that another type of class with no sequence points _is_ shown as 100% covered (also included in the attached archive).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you want to regenerate the coverage, build the solution in Release and then run msbuild Cover.proj, but you'll need to add back in the NuGet packages for NUnit, Nunit.Runners, OpenCover and ReportGenerator because they're not in the attached archive.&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>marklam</author><pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:05:34 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988] 20130402090534A</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9988</link><description>For a class which consists of only automatic get&amp;#59; set&amp;#59; properties, the coverage statistics show 0 covered and 0 uncovered of a possible 0 giving coverage of 0&amp;#37;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Since there&amp;#39;s no code there to test, it would be nice if 0 of 0 was interpreted as 100&amp;#37; rather than 0&amp;#37;, so the coverage bar could be green instead of red.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: danielpalme ** &lt;p&gt;Are you using OpenCover?&lt;br&gt;Are you using the latest release of ReportGenerator (version 1.8.0.0)?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Could you provide me your coverage file and the source code of the class containing only auto properties?&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:26:54 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988] 20130328072654P</guid></item><item><title>Created Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9988</link><description>For a class which consists of only automatic get&amp;#59; set&amp;#59; properties, the coverage statistics show 0 covered and 0 uncovered of a possible 0 giving coverage of 0&amp;#37;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Since there&amp;#39;s no code there to test, it would be nice if 0 of 0 was interpreted as 100&amp;#37; rather than 0&amp;#37;, so the coverage bar could be green instead of red.&lt;br /&gt;</description><author>marklam</author><pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:08:11 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Created Issue: Class with all auto-properties shows 0% coverage [9988] 20130328050811P</guid></item><item><title>Closed Issue: Mark complete line (lightred/lightgreen ) according to coverage status [9913]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9913</link><description>The coverage status of each line is marked by a red or green marker at the left of the line.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It would be great if the whole line could be marked lightred or lightgreen. Makes it easier to realize which line is covered and which is not.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: Fixed in revision 72194&lt;br /&gt;I made the background colors a bit darker.</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 20:14:52 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Closed Issue: Mark complete line (lightred/lightgreen ) according to coverage status [9913] 20130314081452P</guid></item><item><title>Closed Issue: Feature request: Top N methods/classes to cover [9875]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9875</link><description>Please, consider adding a section to a report that would list top N methods&amp;#47;classes sorted by the number of uncovered lines.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: Fixed in revision 72194</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 20:14:20 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Closed Issue: Feature request: Top N methods/classes to cover [9875] 20130314081420P</guid></item><item><title>Closed Issue: Aggregate results by namespace [9891]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9891</link><description>ReportGenerator currently reports results at assembly level and&amp;#47;or at class level. &lt;br /&gt;It would be very useful to be able to also report results at an intermediate level, namely at namespace level. &lt;br /&gt;For nested namespaces, there are two possible ways I can think of&amp;#58;&lt;br /&gt;1. Specify a fixed max depth in the command line&lt;br /&gt;- e.g. a max depth of 2 for namespaces &amp;#39;My&amp;#39;&amp;#59; &amp;#39;My.Name&amp;#39; and &amp;#39;My.Name.Space&amp;#39; would generate reports for &amp;#39;My&amp;#39; and &amp;#39;My.Name&amp;#39; &lt;br /&gt;2. A hierarchical result that would allow drill-down to any level of nested namespaces.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;NCover &amp;#40;the original open-source one, not to mention the commercial one&amp;#41; has this&amp;#58; http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;ncover.sourceforge.net&amp;#47;sample-output&amp;#47;NCover-report.html&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;dotCover has this&amp;#58; http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;www.jetbrains.com&amp;#47;dotcover&amp;#47;features&amp;#47;img&amp;#47;dotcover-html-report_thumb.png &lt;br /&gt;or http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;www.jetbrains.com&amp;#47;dotcover&amp;#47;features&amp;#47;index.html&lt;br /&gt;...etc.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thanks&amp;#33;&lt;br /&gt;Comments: Fixed in revision 72194</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 20:14:01 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Closed Issue: Aggregate results by namespace [9891] 20130314081401P</guid></item><item><title>Closed Issue: Html Summary generate anchors [9935]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9935</link><description>If you generate an HtmlSummary report the file for the single classes are not generated but the anchor it&amp;#39;s included in the index.htm file, so that when you click on the class you have a page not found error.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: Fixed in revision 72194</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 20:13:35 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Closed Issue: Html Summary generate anchors [9935] 20130314081335P</guid></item><item><title>Closed Issue: Improvement in HtmlSummary report [9937]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9937</link><description>I really like the HtmlSummary report because it allow me to include a report that users can look at without the need for Visual Studio or other tools installed.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To allow easier usage of this report I suggest the following&amp;#58;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&amp;#41; Include the CSS file inside the Html &amp;#40;just for the summary report&amp;#41; so that we do not need to compress file but we can simply email the html file and it&amp;#39;s self contained&lt;br /&gt;2&amp;#41; Start the report in compressed mode and not with all the classes expanded&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;From my point of view the &amp;#34;summary&amp;#34; need to be used as a management report &amp;#40;easy, simple, quick to email and quick to open from email&amp;#41; while the standard report is good as it is.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regards&lt;br /&gt;Massimo&lt;br /&gt;Comments: Fixed in revision 72194</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 20:13:18 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Closed Issue: Improvement in HtmlSummary report [9937] 20130314081318P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Improvement in HtmlSummary report [9937]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9937</link><description>I really like the HtmlSummary report because it allow me to include a report that users can look at without the need for Visual Studio or other tools installed.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To allow easier usage of this report I suggest the following&amp;#58;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&amp;#41; Include the CSS file inside the Html &amp;#40;just for the summary report&amp;#41; so that we do not need to compress file but we can simply email the html file and it&amp;#39;s self contained&lt;br /&gt;2&amp;#41; Start the report in compressed mode and not with all the classes expanded&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;From my point of view the &amp;#34;summary&amp;#34; need to be used as a management report &amp;#40;easy, simple, quick to email and quick to open from email&amp;#41; while the standard report is good as it is.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regards&lt;br /&gt;Massimo&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: danielpalme ** &lt;p&gt;I fixed the first issue. The second is unchanged. It takes a single click to collapse all assemblies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Please try the latest download:&lt;br&gt;http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/releases/view/102442&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:54:05 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Improvement in HtmlSummary report [9937] 20130308085405P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Html Summary generate anchors [9935]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9935</link><description>If you generate an HtmlSummary report the file for the single classes are not generated but the anchor it&amp;#39;s included in the index.htm file, so that when you click on the class you have a page not found error.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: danielpalme ** &lt;p&gt;Fixed in Beta 2. Please try the latest download:&lt;br&gt;http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/releases/view/102442&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:51:51 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Html Summary generate anchors [9935] 20130308085151P</guid></item><item><title>Created Issue: Improvement in HtmlSummary report [9937]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9937</link><description>I really like the HtmlSummary report because it allow me to include a report that users can look at without the need for Visual Studio or other tools installed.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To allow easier usage of this report I suggest the following&amp;#58;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&amp;#41; Include the CSS file inside the Html &amp;#40;just for the summary report&amp;#41; so that we do not need to compress file but we can simply email the html file and it&amp;#39;s self contained&lt;br /&gt;2&amp;#41; Start the report in compressed mode and not with all the classes expanded&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;From my point of view the &amp;#34;summary&amp;#34; need to be used as a management report &amp;#40;easy, simple, quick to email and quick to open from email&amp;#41; while the standard report is good as it is.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regards&lt;br /&gt;Massimo&lt;br /&gt;</description><author>massimogentilini</author><pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:50:19 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Created Issue: Improvement in HtmlSummary report [9937] 20130306095019A</guid></item><item><title>Created Issue: Html Summary generate anchors [9935]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9935</link><description>If you generate an HtmlSummary report the file for the single classes are not generated but the anchor it&amp;#39;s included in the index.htm file, so that when you click on the class you have a page not found error.&lt;br /&gt;</description><author>massimogentilini</author><pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:46:06 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Created Issue: Html Summary generate anchors [9935] 20130306094606A</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Aggregate results by namespace [9891]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9891</link><description>ReportGenerator currently reports results at assembly level and&amp;#47;or at class level. &lt;br /&gt;It would be very useful to be able to also report results at an intermediate level, namely at namespace level. &lt;br /&gt;For nested namespaces, there are two possible ways I can think of&amp;#58;&lt;br /&gt;1. Specify a fixed max depth in the command line&lt;br /&gt;- e.g. a max depth of 2 for namespaces &amp;#39;My&amp;#39;&amp;#59; &amp;#39;My.Name&amp;#39; and &amp;#39;My.Name.Space&amp;#39; would generate reports for &amp;#39;My&amp;#39; and &amp;#39;My.Name&amp;#39; &lt;br /&gt;2. A hierarchical result that would allow drill-down to any level of nested namespaces.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;NCover &amp;#40;the original open-source one, not to mention the commercial one&amp;#41; has this&amp;#58; http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;ncover.sourceforge.net&amp;#47;sample-output&amp;#47;NCover-report.html&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;dotCover has this&amp;#58; http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;www.jetbrains.com&amp;#47;dotcover&amp;#47;features&amp;#47;img&amp;#47;dotcover-html-report_thumb.png &lt;br /&gt;or http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;www.jetbrains.com&amp;#47;dotcover&amp;#47;features&amp;#47;index.html&lt;br /&gt;...etc.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thanks&amp;#33;&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: fdsaasdf ** &lt;p&gt;I'll check it out one of these days. Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>fdsaasdf</author><pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 14:13:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Aggregate results by namespace [9891] 20130228021355P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Mark complete line (lightred/lightgreen ) according to coverage status [9913]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9913</link><description>The coverage status of each line is marked by a red or green marker at the left of the line.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It would be great if the whole line could be marked lightred or lightgreen. Makes it easier to realize which line is covered and which is not.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: danielpalme ** &lt;p&gt;Thanks for the feedback. I will try your suggestion and probably add them in the final release of version 1.8.0.0&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 14:05:23 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Mark complete line (lightred/lightgreen ) according to coverage status [9913] 20130228020523P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Mark complete line (lightred/lightgreen ) according to coverage status [9913]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9913</link><description>The coverage status of each line is marked by a red or green marker at the left of the line.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It would be great if the whole line could be marked lightred or lightgreen. Makes it easier to realize which line is covered and which is not.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: manu601 ** &lt;p&gt;We tried the beta release and it works fine. Thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But I've the note something: If one can recognize the colored lines is extremely dependent on the color/brightness/contrast parameters of the display (and eventuelly on the displays quality). So I tried out different color values and let some colleagues check it. Here is a set of colors that works fine - not too bright but with recognizable colored lines on all the displays we've checked:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;.lightgreen { background-color: #caf9ca; }&lt;br&gt;.lightred { background-color: #f9caca; }&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>manu601</author><pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:50:34 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Mark complete line (lightred/lightgreen ) according to coverage status [9913] 20130228015034P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Feature request: Top N methods/classes to cover [9875]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9875</link><description>Please, consider adding a section to a report that would list top N methods&amp;#47;classes sorted by the number of uncovered lines.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: estrizhok ** &lt;p&gt;Very cool! Thank you! It will definitely work for classes. As for methods, it's not clear how useful such information would be.  &lt;/p&gt;</description><author>estrizhok</author><pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:39:26 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Feature request: Top N methods/classes to cover [9875] 20130225083926P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Aggregate results by namespace [9891]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9891</link><description>ReportGenerator currently reports results at assembly level and&amp;#47;or at class level. &lt;br /&gt;It would be very useful to be able to also report results at an intermediate level, namely at namespace level. &lt;br /&gt;For nested namespaces, there are two possible ways I can think of&amp;#58;&lt;br /&gt;1. Specify a fixed max depth in the command line&lt;br /&gt;- e.g. a max depth of 2 for namespaces &amp;#39;My&amp;#39;&amp;#59; &amp;#39;My.Name&amp;#39; and &amp;#39;My.Name.Space&amp;#39; would generate reports for &amp;#39;My&amp;#39; and &amp;#39;My.Name&amp;#39; &lt;br /&gt;2. A hierarchical result that would allow drill-down to any level of nested namespaces.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;NCover &amp;#40;the original open-source one, not to mention the commercial one&amp;#41; has this&amp;#58; http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;ncover.sourceforge.net&amp;#47;sample-output&amp;#47;NCover-report.html&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;dotCover has this&amp;#58; http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;www.jetbrains.com&amp;#47;dotcover&amp;#47;features&amp;#47;img&amp;#47;dotcover-html-report_thumb.png &lt;br /&gt;or http&amp;#58;&amp;#47;&amp;#47;www.jetbrains.com&amp;#47;dotcover&amp;#47;features&amp;#47;index.html&lt;br /&gt;...etc.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thanks&amp;#33;&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: danielpalme ** &lt;p&gt;Fixed in version 1.8.0.0. Currently a beta release is available.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The HTML report now contains more columns and the ability to group classes dynamically by namespace.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Please take a look at it and let me know if everything works as expected.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your help.&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:30:46 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Aggregate results by namespace [9891] 20130224083046P</guid></item><item><title>Commented Issue: Feature request: Top N methods/classes to cover [9875]</title><link>http://reportgenerator.codeplex.com/workitem/9875</link><description>Please, consider adding a section to a report that would list top N methods&amp;#47;classes sorted by the number of uncovered lines.&lt;br /&gt;Comments: ** Comment from web user: danielpalme ** &lt;p&gt;Fixed in version 1.8.0.0. Currently a beta release is available.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The HTML report now contains more columns. You are able to sort the classes by the number of uncovered lines.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Please take a look at it and let me know if everything works as expected.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your help.&lt;/p&gt;</description><author>danielpalme</author><pubDate>Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:27:20 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">Commented Issue: Feature request: Top N methods/classes to cover [9875] 20130224082720P</guid></item></channel></rss>