Update coverage to 4.3.4

[pyup-bot]

There's a new version of coverage available.
You are currently using 4.2. I have updated it to 4.3.4

These links might come in handy: PyPI | Changelog | Docs

Changelog

4.3.4

---

• Fixing 2.6 in version 4.3.3 broke other things, because the too-tricky
  exception wasn't properly derived from Exception, described in issue 556_.
  A newb mistake; it hasn't been a good few days.

.. _issue 556: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/556/43-fails-if-there-are-html-files-in-the

.. _changes_433:

4.3.3

---

• Python 2.6 support was broken due to a testing exception imported for the
  benefit of the coverage.py test suite. Properly conditionalizing it fixed
  issue 554_ so that Python 2.6 works again.

.. _issue 554: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/554/traceback-on-python-26-starting-with-432

.. _changes_432:

4.3.2

---

• Using the --skip-covered option on an HTML report with 100% coverage
  would cause a "No data to report" error, as reported in issue 549_. This is
  now fixed; thanks, Loïc Dachary.

• If-statements can be optimized away during compilation, for example, if 0:
  or if __debug__:. Coverage.py had problems properly understanding these
  statements which existed in the source, but not in the compiled bytecode.
  This problem, reported in issue 522_, is now fixed.

• If you specified --source as a directory, then coverage.py would look for
  importable Python files in that directory, and could identify ones that had
  never been executed at all. But if you specified it as a package name, that
  detection wasn't performed. Now it is, closing issue 426_. Thanks to Loïc
  Dachary for the fix.

• If you started and stopped coverage measurement thousands of times in your
  process, you could crash Python with a "Fatal Python error: deallocating
  None" error. This is now fixed. Thanks to Alex Groce for the bug report.

• On PyPy, measuring coverage in subprocesses could produce a warning: "Trace
  function changed, measurement is likely wrong: None". This was spurious, and
  has been suppressed.

• Previously, coverage.py couldn't start on Jython, due to that implementation
  missing the multiprocessing module (issue 551). This problem has now been
  fixed. Also, issue 322 about not being able to invoke coverage
  conveniently, seems much better: jython -m coverage run myprog.py works
  properly.

• Let's say you ran the HTML report over and over again in the same output
  directory, with --skip-covered. And imagine due to your heroic
  test-writing efforts, a file just acheived the goal of 100% coverage. With
  coverage.py 4.3, the old HTML file with the less-than-100% coverage would be
  left behind. This file is now properly deleted.

.. _issue 322: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/322/cannot-use-coverage-with-jython
.. issue 426: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/426/difference-between-coverage-results-with
.. issue 522: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/522/incorrect-branch-reporting-with-__debug
.. _issue 549: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/549/skip-covered-with-100-coverage-throws-a-no
.. _issue 551: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/551/coveragepy-cannot-be-imported-in-jython27

.. _changes_431:

4.3.1

---

• Some environments couldn't install 4.3, as described in issue 540_. This is
  now fixed.

• The check for conflicting --source and --include was too simple in a
  few different ways, breaking a few perfectly reasonable use cases, described
  in issue 541. The check has been reverted while we re-think the fix for
  issue 265.

.. _issue 540: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/540/cant-install-coverage-v43-into-under
.. _issue 541: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/541/coverage-43-breaks-nosetest-with-coverage

.. _changes_43:

4.3

---

Special thanks to Loïc Dachary, who took an extraordinary interest in
coverage.py and contributed a number of improvements in this release.

• Subprocesses that are measured with automatic subprocess measurement_ used
  to read in any pre-existing data file. This meant data would be incorrectly
  carried forward from run to run. Now those files are not read, so each
  subprocess only writes its own data. Fixes issue 510_.

• The coverage combine command will now fail if there are no data files to
  combine. The combine changes in 4.2 meant that multiple combines could lose
  data, leaving you with an empty .coverage data file. Fixes
  issue 525, issue 412, issue 516, and probably issue 511.

• Coverage.py wouldn't execute sys.excepthook_ when an exception happened in
  your program. Now it does, thanks to Andrew Hoos. Closes issue 535_.

• Branch coverage fixes:

• Branch coverage could misunderstand a finally clause on a try block that
  never continued on to the following statement, as described in issue 493_. This is now fixed. Thanks to Joe Doherty for the report and Loïc
  Dachary for the fix.

• A while loop with a constant condition (while True) and a continue
  statement would be mis-analyzed, as described in issue 496_. This is now
  fixed, thanks to a bug report by Eli Skeggs and a fix by Loïc Dachary.

• While loops with constant conditions that were never executed could result
  in a non-zero coverage report. Artem Dayneko reported this in issue 502_, and Loïc Dachary provided the fix.

• The HTML report now supports a --skip-covered option like the other
  reporting commands. Thanks, Loïc Dachary for the implementation, closing
  issue 433_.

• Options can now be read from a tox.ini file, if any. Like setup.cfg, sections
  are prefixed with "coverage:", so [run] options will be read from the
  [coverage:run] section of tox.ini. Implements part of issue 519_.
  Thanks, Stephen Finucane.

• Specifying both --source and --include no longer silently ignores the
  include setting, instead it fails with a message. Thanks, Nathan Land and
  Loïc Dachary. Closes issue 265_.

• The Coverage.combine method has a new parameter, strict=False, to
  support failing if there are no data files to combine.

• When forking subprocesses, the coverage data files would have the same random
  number appended to the file name. This didn't cause problems, because the
  file names had the process id also, making collisions (nearly) impossible.
  But it was disconcerting. This is now fixed.

• The text report now properly sizes headers when skipping some files, fixing
  issue 524_. Thanks, Anthony Sottile and Loïc Dachary.

• Coverage.py can now search .pex files for source, just as it can .zip and
  .egg. Thanks, Peter Ebden.

• Data files are now about 15% smaller.

• Improvements in the [run] debug setting:

• The "dataio" debug setting now also logs when data files are deleted during
  combining or erasing.

• A new debug option, "multiproc", for logging the behavior of
  concurrency=multiprocessing.

• If you used the debug options "config" and "callers" together, you'd get a
  call stack printed for every line in the multi-line config output. This is
  now fixed.

• Fixed an unusual bug involving multiple coding declarations affecting code
  containing code in multi-line strings: issue 529_.

• Coverage.py will no longer be misled into thinking that a plain file is a
  package when interpreting --source options. Thanks, Cosimo Lupo.

• If you try to run a non-Python file with coverage.py, you will now get a more
  useful error message. Issue 514_.

• The default pragma regex changed slightly, but this will only matter to you
  if you are deranged and use mixed-case pragmas.

• Deal properly with non-ASCII file names in an ASCII-only world, issue 533_.

• Programs that set Unicode configuration values could cause UnicodeErrors when
  generating HTML reports. Pytest-cov is one example. This is now fixed.

• Prevented deprecation warnings from configparser that happened in some
  circumstances, closing issue 530_.

• Corrected the name of the jquery.ba-throttle-debounce.js library. Thanks,
  Ben Finney. Closes issue 505_.

• Testing against PyPy 5.6 and PyPy3 5.5.

• Switched to pytest from nose for running the coverage.py tests.

• Renamed AUTHORS.txt to CONTRIBUTORS.txt, since there are other ways to
  contribute than by writing code. Also put the count of contributors into the
  author string in setup.py, though this might be too cute.

.. _sys.excepthook: https://docs.python.org/3/library/sys.htmlsys.excepthook
.. _issue 265: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/265/when-using-source-include-is-silently
.. _issue 412: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/412/coverage-combine-should-error-if-no
.. _issue 433: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/433/coverage-html-does-not-suport-skip-covered
.. _issue 493: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/493/confusing-branching-failure
.. _issue 496: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/496/incorrect-coverage-with-branching-and
.. _issue 502: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/502/incorrect-coverage-report-with-cover
.. _issue 505: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/505/use-canonical-filename-for-debounce
.. _issue 514: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/514/path-to-problem-file-not-reported-when
.. _issue 510: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/510/erase-still-needed-in-42
.. _issue 511: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/511/version-42-coverage-combine-empties
.. _issue 516: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/516/running-coverage-combine-twice-deletes-all
.. _issue 519: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/519/coverage-run-sections-in-toxini-or-as
.. _issue 524: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/524/coverage-report-with-skip-covered-column
.. _issue 525: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/525/coverage-combine-when-not-in-parallel-mode
.. _issue 529: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/529/encoding-marker-may-only-appear-on-the
.. _issue 530: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/530/deprecationwarning-you-passed-a-bytestring
.. _issue 533: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/533/exception-on-unencodable-file-name
.. _issue 535: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/535/sysexcepthook-is-not-called

.. _changes_42:

Got merge conflicts? Close this PR and delete the branch. I'll create a new PR for you.

Happy merging! 🤖

[pyup-bot]

Closing this in favor of #240