This PR was opened quoting 81.4%, measured on b53f326. Holding it until #116,
#117, #119, #121 and #124 merged was the point: by the time it was ready the
number had moved three points, which is the same staleness the entry is about.
Measured on 93ebfa6 with ./gradlew :app:jacocoTestReport:
LINE 1971/2321 84.9% (81.4% four hours earlier, 69.2% on 2026-08-24)
BRANCH 900/1410 63.8% (60.2%, then 53.2%)
454 JVM tests in 67 classes, all green.
The note now says the entry went stale while it was open, because that is a
better argument for the rule than the rule restating itself.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
CLAUDE.md's own rule is "re-measure before quoting", and the figure it carried
was measured on 2026-08-24 -- before the #52 children, the MediaProbe and codec
tests, and the guards from #100/#107 landed. Quoting it now would understate the
suite by twelve points, which is the same failure the bullet directly below it
was written to describe.
Measured on b53f326 with ./gradlew :app:jacocoTestReport:
LINE 1847/2268 81.4% (was 1519/2194, 69.2%)
BRANCH 837/1390 60.2% (was 53.2%)
against 417 JVM tests in 60 classes, all green.
The denominator moved too, 2194 -> 2268: the same push added production code of
its own, so this is not a pure numerator gain and the note now says so. The
Robolectric/isIncludeNoLocationClasses history is left exactly as it was -- it
explains why every pre-2026-08-24 figure was an artifact, and that is still the
most useful thing in the entry. "That date" is now spelled out, since the
headline date above it has moved and the phrase no longer points at itself.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
JMR-dev
