[TASK] Reduce and finetune the scope of @covers annotations

[oliverklee]

The legacy tests are not very focused. Until we have split them up, try to avoid false positives for code coverage.

Also add @covers annotations for the parent classes of the tested classes.

[coveralls]

coverage: 51.499% (-5.3%) from 56.839%
when pulling d6ad84c on task/coversnothing
into ff1af18 on main.

[JakeQZ]

Some of the TestCases do seem to at least partially cover some specific classes...

[JakeQZ]

Doesn't this cover Comment::render() and ParserState::consumeWhitespace()?

[oliverklee]

Comment::render() is called. As far as I understand the tests (which is not far), they're about other elements rendering comments (or not) depending on the OutputFormat settings.

[JakeQZ]

Yes, it's outputFormatter::comments() where the controlling logic is.

[JakeQZ]

Isn't this covering various OutputFormat methods (create* and some of the setters)?

[oliverklee]

As far as I understand this test, it's not about covering how OutputFormat works, but about how other elements get rendered depending on the output format.

[JakeQZ]

Agree it's generally not clear which of the classes this covers - but doesn't it at least cover Settings to some extent?

[oliverklee]

It calls code in Settings (and uses it). It does not test whether Settings actually work correctly, though, and the point of the tests is not testing Settings (as far as I understand them), but how other code works depending on the settings.

[oliverklee]

I'd like to reduce what the legacy tests cover in general, and re-add the @covers annotation when we move/rework the tests, and when we're really sure the behavior of which classes is actually tested (instead of only executed).