No coverage report inside do...while loops

[beeb]

Component

Forge

Have you ensured that all of these are up to date?

• Foundry
• Foundryup

What version of Foundry are you on?

forge 0.2.0 (caef136 2024-01-29T00:20:25.410303708Z)

What command(s) is the bug in?

forge coverage --report lcov

Operating System

Linux

Describe the bug

The coverage report generated by foundry does not include any coverage information inside do...while loops.

Repro: https://github.com/beeb/repro_foundry_coverage

Report below was generated with lcov's genhtml using the report generated by forge.

[kayagokalp]

I did a little bit of digging for this one, my first guess was an error with the visitor implementation but it was not the case, it looks like statements are omitted while generating lcov reports. I am not sure about the reason but there is comment that says statement's are not compatible with lcov. I am not very familiar with lcov so not sure about the next statement but, I feel like adding DA to lcov report for statements should work.

foundry/crates/forge/src/coverage.rs

Lines 119 to 120 in e897bd6

	// Statements are not in the LCOV format
	CoverageItemKind::Statement => (),

By changing it to emit DA values I obtained following coverage report for the project reported:

I have the change, produced this coverage report here on my fork:
https://github.com/kayagokalp/foundry/tree/kayagokalp/add-statements-to-coverage

I can open a PR but if we have some context on why the comment said statements are not compatible, that would be great. I don't want to introduce a regression.

[beeb]

Thanks a lot for looking into this! The fixed example you showed looks great, hopefully someone can confirm it wouldn't cause problems elsewhere.

[beeb]

@onbjerg since git blame points at you maybe you can pitch in? Thanks ^^

[onbjerg]

we can add DA to lcov but note that expressions and statements are two different constructs

please open a PR - coverage does not cover everything because we had to reconstruct the AST data structure ourselves since it is undocumented in solidity, and even worse, changes over different versions.