Fix and enable core unit test coverage

[Charles-Gagnon]

I was able to track down what was causing the coverage to hang, but in the end I don't have a fully clear idea of why it's failing for us and presumably not for VS Code.

The line in question that led me to the fix was this :

[4225:0318/190144.273645:INFO:CONSOLE(109)] "Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected token '??'", source: vm.js (109)

After digging around in loader.js for a bit I was able to get it to spit out what file it came from and from there was just a matter of seeing which one of the ??'s was causing the issue.

There are numerous other reports of similar invalid code generation being done by instanbul, but since this fixes the issue and is relatively scoped I chose to end my investigation here since there isn't much value to be gained currently from digging into it more.

https://coveralls.io/builds/47556601

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 2018765633

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• 113 unchanged lines in 3 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-5.5%) to 42.51%

---

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
extensions/dacpac/src/wizard/dataTierApplicationWizard.ts	18	80.99%
extensions/sql-bindings/src/services/azureFunctionsService.ts	21	12.35%
extensions/sql-bindings/src/common/azureFunctionsUtils.ts	74	26.39%

Totals
Change from base Build 2006236141:	-5.5%
Covered Lines:	27559
Relevant Lines:	60570

---

💛 - Coveralls

[chlafreniere]

Can we map so that we're not comparing the out directory but instead the sql directory?

[Charles-Gagnon]

I'll take a look at it if I have time (but not going to prioritize it unless we have a specific need for that asap), but first order of business is to at least get these up and running again.

[Charles-Gagnon]

@chlafreniere Ok, this should fix generating coverage for the ts files now. The line commented out was added as part of the last merge - I'm going to follow up with VS Code to see if I can understand why it was added since there isn't any clues in the commit and I'm not sure why this would need to be done.

microsoft/vscode@4355270

This should be safe to do since it's only affecting local build - product builds weren't affected by this to begin with.

[Charles-Gagnon]

Filed issue in VS Code repo as well since this happens in their repo as well : microsoft/vscode#145598

[Charles-Gagnon]

@chlafreniere Thoughts on the marked.js file showing up separately? Since it's not compiled I'm not sure there's a way to map it back to the one under src/.

So we could either leave it as it is or just remove it from the report completely.

[chlafreniere]

@chlafreniere Thoughts on the marked.js file showing up separately? Since it's not compiled I'm not sure there's a way to map it back to the one under src/.

So we could either leave it as it is or just remove it from the report completely.

Personally, I'd vote for just removing it. Not convinced the value add (which itself is probably not very high -- it's not like we've made lots of changes in this file) is worth it enough to have this confusion over why the "out" folder shows up for just one file.