{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo/issues/56","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo/issues/56/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo/issues/56/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo/issues/56/events","html_url":"https://github.com/pyupio/demo/pull/56","id":156106621,"number":56,"title":"Update coverage to 4.1","user":{"login":"pyup-bot","id":16239342,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/16239342?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot","html_url":"https://github.com/pyup-bot","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2016-05-21T15:13:15Z","updated_at":"2016-09-21T13:41:12Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo/pulls/56","html_url":"https://github.com/pyupio/demo/pull/56","diff_url":"https://github.com/pyupio/demo/pull/56.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/pyupio/demo/pull/56.patch"},"body":"\nThere's a new version of [coverage](https://pypi.python.org/pypi/coverage) available.\nYou are currently using **4.0.3**. I have updated it to **4.1**\n\n\n\n\n\n### Changelog\n> \n>### 4.1\n\n>--------------------------\n\n>- The internal attribute `Reporter.file_reporters` was removed in 4.1b3.  It\n>  should have come has no surprise that there were third-party tools out there\n>  using that attribute.  It has been restored, but with a deprecation warning.\n\n\n\n\n>### 4.1b3\n\n>----------------------------\n\n>- When running your program, execution can jump from an ``except X:`` line to\n>  some other line when an exception other than ``X`` happens.  This jump is no\n>  longer considered a branch when measuring branch coverage.\n\n>- When measuring branch coverage, ``yield`` statements that were never resumed\n>  were incorrectly marked as missing, as reported in `issue 440`_.  This is now\n>  fixed.\n\n>- During branch coverage of single-line callables like lambdas and generator\n>  expressions, coverage.py can now distinguish between them never being called,\n>  or being called but not completed.  Fixes `issue 90`_, `issue 460`_ and\n>  `issue 475`_.\n\n>- The HTML report now has a map of the file along the rightmost edge of the\n>  page, giving an overview of where the missed lines are.  Thanks, Dmitry\n>  Shishov.\n\n>- The HTML report now uses different monospaced fonts, favoring Consolas over\n>  Courier.  Along the way, `issue 472`_ about not properly handling one-space\n>  indents was fixed.  The index page also has slightly different styling, to\n>  try to make the clickable detail pages more apparent.\n\n>- Missing branches reported with ``coverage report -m`` will now say ``-&gt;exit``\n>  for missed branches to the exit of a function, rather than a negative number.\n>  Fixes `issue 469`_.\n\n>- ``coverage --help`` and ``coverage --version`` now mention which tracer is\n>  installed, to help diagnose problems. The docs mention which features need\n>  the C extension. (`issue 479`_)\n\n>- Officially support PyPy 5.1, which required no changes, just updates to the\n>  docs.\n\n>- The `Coverage.report` function had two parameters with non-None defaults,\n>  which have been changed.  `show_missing` used to default to True, but now\n>  defaults to None.  If you had been calling `Coverage.report` without\n>  specifying `show_missing`, you&#39;ll need to explicitly set it to True to keep\n>  the same behavior.  `skip_covered` used to default to False. It is now None,\n>  which doesn&#39;t change the behavior.  This fixes `issue 485`_.\n\n>- It&#39;s never been possible to pass a namespace module to one of the analysis\n>  functions, but now at least we raise a more specific error message, rather\n>  than getting confused. (`issue 456`_)\n\n>- The `coverage.process_startup` function now returns the `Coverage` instance\n>  it creates, as suggested in `issue 481`_.\n\n>- Make a small tweak to how we compare threads, to avoid buggy custom\n>  comparison code in thread classes. (`issue 245`_)\n\n>.. _issue 90: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/90/lambda-expression-confuses-branch\n>.. _issue 245: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/245/change-solution-for-issue-164\n>.. _issue 440: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/440/yielded-twisted-failure-marked-as-missed\n>.. _issue 456: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/456/coverage-breaks-with-implicit-namespaces\n>.. _issue 460: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/460/confusing-html-report-for-certain-partial\n>.. _issue 469: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/469/strange-1-line-number-in-branch-coverage\n>.. _issue 472: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/472/html-report-indents-incorrectly-for-one\n>.. _issue 475: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/475/generator-expression-is-marked-as-not\n>.. _issue 479: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/479/clarify-the-need-for-the-c-extension\n>.. _issue 481: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/481/asyncioprocesspoolexecutor-tracing-not\n>.. _issue 485: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/485/coveragereport-ignores-show_missing-and\n\n\n\n\n>### 4.1b2\n\n>----------------------------\n\n>- Problems with the new branch measurement in 4.1 beta 1 were fixed:\n\n>  - Class docstrings were considered executable.  Now they no longer are.\n\n>  - ``yield from`` and ``await`` were considered returns from functions, since\n>    they could tranfer control to the caller.  This produced unhelpful &quot;missing\n>    branch&quot; reports in a number of circumstances.  Now they no longer are\n>    considered returns.\n\n>  - In unusual situations, a missing branch to a negative number was reported.\n>    This has been fixed, closing `issue 466`_.\n\n>- The XML report now produces correct package names for modules found in\n>  directories specified with ``source=``.  Fixes `issue 465`_.\n\n>- ``coverage report`` won&#39;t produce trailing whitespace.\n\n>.. _issue 465: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/465/coveragexml-produces-package-names-with-an\n>.. _issue 466: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/466/impossible-missed-branch-to-a-negative\n\n\n\n\n>### 4.1b1\n\n>----------------------------\n\n>- Branch analysis has been rewritten: it used to be based on bytecode, but now\n>  uses AST analysis.  This has changed a number of things:\n\n>  - More code paths are now considered runnable, especially in\n>    ``try``/``except`` structures.  This may mean that coverage.py will\n>    identify more code paths as uncovered.  This could either raise or lower\n>    your overall coverage number.\n\n>  - Python 3.5&#39;s ``async`` and ``await`` keywords are properly supported,\n>    fixing `issue 434`_.\n\n>  - Some long-standing branch coverage bugs were fixed:\n\n>    - `issue 129`_: functions with only a docstring for a body would\n>      incorrectly report a missing branch on the ``def`` line.\n\n>    - `issue 212`_: code in an ``except`` block could be incorrectly marked as\n>      a missing branch.\n\n>    - `issue 146`_: context managers (``with`` statements) in a loop or ``try``\n>      block could confuse the branch measurement, reporting incorrect partial\n>      branches.\n\n>    - `issue 422`_: in Python 3.5, an actual partial branch could be marked as\n>      complete.\n\n>- Pragmas to disable coverage measurement can now be used on decorator lines,\n>  and they will apply to the entire function or class being decorated.  This\n>  implements the feature requested in `issue 131`_.\n\n>- Multiprocessing support is now available on Windows.  Thanks, Rodrigue\n>  Cloutier.\n\n>- Files with two encoding declarations are properly supported, fixing\n>  `issue 453`_. Thanks, Max Linke.\n\n>- Non-ascii characters in regexes in the configuration file worked in 3.7, but\n>  stopped working in 4.0.  Now they work again, closing `issue 455`_.\n\n>- Form-feed characters would prevent accurate determination of the beginning of\n>  statements in the rest of the file.  This is now fixed, closing `issue 461`_.\n\n>.. _issue 129: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/129/misleading-branch-coverage-of-empty\n>.. _issue 131: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/131/pragma-on-a-decorator-line-should-affect\n>.. _issue 146: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/146/context-managers-confuse-branch-coverage\n>.. _issue 212: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/212/coverage-erroneously-reports-partial\n>.. _issue 422: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/422/python35-partial-branch-marked-as-fully\n>.. _issue 434: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/434/indexerror-in-python-35\n>.. _issue 453: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/453/source-code-encoding-can-only-be-specified\n>.. _issue 455: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/455/unusual-exclusions-stopped-working-in\n>.. _issue 461: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/461/multiline-asserts-need-too-many-pragma\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nHappy merging! 🤖\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo/issues/comments/248615614","html_url":"https://github.com/pyupio/demo/pull/56#issuecomment-248615614","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/pyupio/demo/issues/56","id":248615614,"user":{"login":"pyup-bot","id":16239342,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/16239342?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot","html_url":"https://github.com/pyup-bot","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/pyup-bot/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-09-21T13:41:12Z","updated_at":"2016-09-21T13:41:12Z","body":"Closing this in favor of #70"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"pyup-bot"}}