kcov VS neotest

Logically after the 24 of January the rate felt very low, but not to zero. Styx backend supports emiting of DWARF debug informations and they can be used by tools to produce coverage reports. In particular I used kcov, which produces nice html output but also cobertura-style reports that are compatible with CodeCov.

Did you look into kcov yet? https://github.com/SimonKagstrom/kcov

My first neovim plugin project was to write an adapter (runner) for neotest, for a language that I use regularly and which was missing from the existing adapters.

There's overseer.nvim to run all sorts of things and neotest to run tests. In general, you can check awesome-neovim or TWiN to look for plugins.

Here's some things that may help: - https://github.com/mfussenegger/nvim-dap + dap ui - https://github.com/nvim-neotest/neotest

I use neotest to run tests (with pytest).

For testing I use https://github.com/nvim-neotest/neotest which gives a nice outline.

For those who don't know it, it's an adapter for neotest, a Neovim plugin that

You might look at how Neotest handles this, or even see if you can use/contribute to that project directly. It already has support for a fair number of languages at varying levels of maturity.

I am writing Python these days, and LSP + DAP + neotest give me 90% of what PyCharm would have given me. I don't know how well this works with Java, the latter two did not exist when I was still writing Java. The way I did it was use Neovim with jdt-ls to write code and IntelliJ for debugging. Debugging does not require switching between keyboard and mouse, so it was OK to me.

I'm sure that we could figure out a way to install rocks without luarocks, but it's still going to be an additional step with possible complications. Personally, I would rather just embed the library within my plugin like neotest does with xml2lua. The marginal cost of a slightly larger install is more than paid for by an easier install process and a guarantee that it works.