Allow removal of .mem files alongside .cov files

[bluesmoon]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 4 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 98.54%. Comparing base (9e1ce8f) to head (5c72699).

❗ Current head 5c72699 differs from pull request most recent head 325bc7a. Consider uploading reports for the commit 325bc7a to get more accurate results

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/CoverageTools.jl	60.00%	4 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##            master      #72      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   100.00%   98.54%   -1.46%     
===========================================
  Files            4        4              
  Lines          271      274       +3     
===========================================
- Hits           271      270       -1     
- Misses           0        4       +4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[bluesmoon]

I don't understand this test failure. It looks more like a change in the way Julia nightly reports a particular exception:

Processing coverage: Test Failed at /home/runner/work/CoverageTools.jl/CoverageTools.jl/test/runtests.jl:200
  Expression: process_file(bustedfile, srcdir)
    Expected: Base.Meta.ParseError("parsing error in /home/runner/work/CoverageTools.jl/CoverageTools.jl/test/BustedPackage/src/parseerr.jl:7: invalid iteration specification", nothing)
      Thrown: Base.Meta.ParseError("parsing error in /home/runner/work/CoverageTools.jl/CoverageTools.jl/test/BustedPackage/src/parseerr.jl:8: Base.Meta.ParseError(\"ParseError:\\n# Error @ none:3:10\\n    s = 0\\n    for i [1,2,3]   # this line has a parsing error\\n#        └─┘ ── invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\", Base.JuliaSyntax.ParseError(Base.JuliaSyntax.SourceFile(\"function parseerr()\\n    s = 0\\n    for i [1,2,3]   # this line has a parsing error\\n        \", 42, \"none\", 1, [1, 21, 31, 83, 91]), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic[Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic([82](https://github.com/JuliaCI/CoverageTools.jl/actions/runs/6554881300/job/17802524253?pr=72#step:5:85), 84, :error, \"invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(87, 86, :error, \"invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 88, :error, \"invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 89, :error, \"unexpected `]`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 88, :error, \"Expected `end`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 88, :error, \"Expected `end`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 89, :error, \"extra tokens after end of expression\")], :none))", nothing)
      ParseError("parsing error in /home/runner/work/CoverageTools.jl/CoverageTools.jl/test/BustedPackage/src/parseerr.jl:8: Base.Meta.ParseError(\"ParseError:\\n# Error @ none:3:10\\n    s = 0\\n    for i [1,2,3]   # this line has a parsing error\\n#        └─┘ ── invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\", Base.JuliaSyntax.ParseError(Base.JuliaSyntax.SourceFile(\"function parseerr()\\n    s = 0\\n    for i [1,2,3]   # this line has a parsing error\\n        \", 42, \"none\", 1, [1, 21, 31, [83](https://github.com/JuliaCI/CoverageTools.jl/actions/runs/6554881300/job/17802524253?pr=72#step:5:86), 91]), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic[Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(82, [84](https://github.com/JuliaCI/CoverageTools.jl/actions/runs/6554881300/job/17802524253?pr=72#step:5:87), :error, \"invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(87, 86, :error, \"invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 88, :error, \"invalid iteration spec: expected one of `=` `in` or `∈`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 89, :error, \"unexpected `]`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 88, :error, \"Expected `end`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 88, :error, \"Expected `end`\"), Base.JuliaSyntax.Diagnostic(89, 89, :error, \"extra tokens after end of expression\")], :none))")
      Stacktrace:

[bluesmoon]

bump - can anyone respond here?

[Azzaare]

Ran into the same issue with #73

It comes from the Julia parser, giving different output with each Julia version. I have fixed it for current 1 (1.10). If my PR is accepted, you can probably rebase this PR over main and have your tests pass.

[bluesmoon]

@Azzaare I doubt anything will be accepted here. The last activity on this repo was 3 years ago.

[Azzaare]

@bluesmoon PR #73 was merged! You can probably rebase on master now and have the tests pass!

[fingolfin]

Maybe include_memfiles is not the best name (also_memfiles? also not great)

Well naming is hard. I think it is good enough 🤷