# Codecov/Coveralls reports wrongly showing 100% coverage

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/codecov-coveralls-reports-wrongly-showing-100-coverage/14831
**Category:** General Usage
**Tags:** coverage, travis, ci
**Created:** [September 11, 2018, 8:38pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/codecov-coveralls-reports-wrongly-showing-100-coverage/14831 "2018-09-11T20:38:08Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![harryscholes](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/harryscholes/32/5329_2.png) [@harryscholes](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/harryscholes)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2018, 8:38pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/codecov-coveralls-reports-wrongly-showing-100-coverage/14831/1 "2018-09-11T20:38:08Z")

</div>

Although it would be great, I definitely don’t have 100% test coverage. See an example commit report [here](https://codecov.io/gh/harryscholes/LSMH.jl/tree/5fd67485f90a09c9dd87a31112a24ed885ba7690/src) and the git repo at that commit [here](https://github.com/harryscholes/LSMH.jl/tree/5fd67485f90a09c9dd87a31112a24ed885ba7690). Any idea what may be going wrong here?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![navidcy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/navidcy/32/2750_2.png) [@navidcy](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/navidcy)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2018, 4:28am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/codecov-coveralls-reports-wrongly-showing-100-coverage/14831/2 "2018-10-29T04:28:23Z")

</div>

Same here for `FourierFlows.jl`.  
Apparently `v0.7+` is problematic with coverage… see, e.g., [https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/28192](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/28192)