unit: remove GOACC, use Go 1.20 native coverage functionality

[guggero]

Removes the now deprecated GOACC library that we previously used to instrument our code during unit coverage tests.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

🏷️ Labels to auto review (1)

• llm-review

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[yyforyongyu]

Nice!

[ellemouton]

LGTM!

[guggero]

LGTM!

Still trying to get a successful run to see that the coverage actually doesn't decrease with this method. Will merge once confirmed.

[guggero]

Okay, so the coverage works correctly now. But it shows a 12.6% decrease. Probably because the whole lnrpc/ directory previously was excluded (which isn't easily reproducible with the build-in coverage functionality).

Are we okay with this or do we prefer the "old" way? I don't really have an easy way to compare coverage reports between the old and new methods.
Any ideas or preferences? cc @Roasbeef, @bhandras

[bhandras]

Okay, so the coverage works correctly now. But it shows a 12.6% decrease. Probably because the whole lnrpc/ directory previously was excluded (which isn't easily reproducible with the build-in coverage functionality).

Are we okay with this or do we prefer the "old" way? I don't really have an easy way to compare coverage reports between the old and new methods. Any ideas or preferences? cc @Roasbeef, @bhandras

Ideally we should lift non-generated code from lnrpc/ and exclude all generated stubs, but until then I think it's okay to keep it this way.

[Roasbeef]

Ideally we should lift non-generated code from lnrpc/ and exclude all generated stubs, but until then I think it's okay to keep it this way.

Yeah we can extract the non-code gen stuff into like lnrpcutil or something like that. Then we can exclude the entire directory.

Also does the reported code include the itest coverage? I would think not given that we have no coverage listed for areas like this?