Overhaul coverage report

[st0012]

Summary

• Make the coverage result more concise and useful
• Make the output less confusing for C source files
• Simplify implementation by decoupling it from RDoc's markup elements

Before (Ruby pseudo-code format)

class RDoc::Generator::Darkfish # is documented

    # in file lib/rdoc/generator/darkfish.rb:744
    def generate_ancestor_list(ancestors, klass); end

    # in file lib/rdoc/generator/darkfish.rb:762
    def generate_class_link(klass, rel_prefix); end

end


class RDoc::Markup::ToAnsi # is documented

    # in file lib/rdoc/markup/to_ansi.rb:29
    ANSI_STYLE_CODES_OFF = nil

    # in file lib/rdoc/markup/to_ansi.rb:59
    def add_text(text); end

    # in file lib/rdoc/markup/to_ansi.rb:131
    def calculate_text_width(text); end

end

After (file-centric format)

lib/rdoc/generator/darkfish.rb:
  Method:
    RDoc::Generator::Darkfish#generate_ancestor_list                 lib/rdoc/generator/darkfish.rb:744
    RDoc::Generator::Darkfish#generate_class_link                    lib/rdoc/generator/darkfish.rb:762

lib/rdoc/markup/to_ansi.rb:
  Constant:
    RDoc::Markup::ToAnsi::ANSI_STYLE_CODES_OFF lib/rdoc/markup/to_ansi.rb:29
  Method:
    RDoc::Markup::ToAnsi#add_text             lib/rdoc/markup/to_ansi.rb:59
    RDoc::Markup::ToAnsi#calculate_text_width lib/rdoc/markup/to_ansi.rb:131

C source file output (Ruby's object.c)

object.c:
  Class:
    Refinement

No more class Refinement ... end pseudo-code that makes it look like the C file is being treated as a Ruby script.

Accuracy verification

Coverage metrics are unchanged for projects other than RDoc itself:

Project	Branch	Master
IRB	117 items, 40 undoc (65.81%)	117 items, 40 undoc (65.81%)
Ruby	12110 items, 1472 undoc (87.84%)	12110 items, 1472 undoc (87.84%)

[matzbot]

🚀 Preview deployment available at: https://8ac7ce2e.rdoc-6cd.pages.dev (commit: 793635c)

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR refactors RDoc’s coverage reporting to be file-centric and plain-text based (instead of building RDoc::Markup trees), aiming to make coverage output more concise and clearer—especially for C source files.

Changes:

• Reworked RDoc::Stats#report to emit a file/type grouped text report and introduced shared constants for type ordering and the “Great Job!” message.
• Updated RDoc::Stats#summary (and the CLI printing path) to output plain strings directly, removing RDoc::Markup::ToRdoc conversions.
• Revised and expanded stats tests to validate the new output format, including new sorting/grouping scenarios.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

File	Description
test/rdoc/rdoc_stats_test.rb	Updates expectations to the new file-centric text format and adds new tests for ordering/grouping.
lib/rdoc/stats.rb	Implements the new report format and removes markup-element construction in favor of plain strings.
lib/rdoc/rdoc.rb	Prints coverage report and summary as strings (no Markup conversion).

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

assert_match/refute_match in test-unit expects a Regexp; passing a String (as done here) will raise TypeError (String#=~ requires a Regexp). Use assert_includes(report, "...") for substring checks, or convert the expected text to a Regexp (escaping as needed). Similar string-pattern assert_match calls appear throughout this test file and will need the same adjustment.

[Copilot]

refute_match in test-unit expects a Regexp; passing 'CA' as a String will raise TypeError. Prefer refute_match(/CA/, @s.report) or refute_includes(@s.report, 'CA') (the latter is usually clearer for substring checks).

Suggested change

	refute_match 'CA', @s.report
	refute_includes @s.report, 'CA'

[Copilot]

Same issue as above: assert_match requires a Regexp, but this passes a multi-line String. Use assert_includes(report, ...) or a Regexp with the correct escaping/newline handling (e.g., /.../m) so the assertion actually runs under test-unit.