Lack of support for go 1.22 - easy to fix

[Johnlon]

There is only a single func in this code base that make this tool incompatible with go 1.22

Can I request that call is replaced by a simple iterator instead.

I'm sorry I haven't got the call to hand but switch to 1.22 and you'll find it instantly.

5 mins work and we have a tool that works across multiple revisions of go.

[vladopajic]

hey, thank you for being interested in improving this tool.

so far no one has complained that they need this tool to be compatible with 1.22. to be honest, let’s push them to upgrade their go versions. how difficult could it really be for go?

[Johnlon]

some of us are working within constraints

no worries I'll fork it and fix the various issues.

cheers

[vladopajic]

tool is compatible with v1.22, for example go-actor repo uses v1.22 of go and together with go 1.22 installed on system it is still executing and preforming correctly.

:~ go-actor$ go version
go version go1.22.12 linux/amd64

:~ go-actor$ make check-coverage 
go install github.com/vladopajic/go-test-coverage/v2@latest
go: github.com/vladopajic/go-test-coverage/v2@v2.12.0 requires go >= 1.23; switching to go1.23.6
go test ./... -coverprofile=./cover.out -covermode=atomic -coverpkg=./...
ok      github.com/vladopajic/go-actor/actor    0.347s  coverage: 100.0% of statements in ./...
$(go env GOPATH)/bin/go-test-coverage -config=./.testcoverage.yml
File coverage threshold (100%) satisfied:       PASS
Total coverage threshold (100%) satisfied:      PASS
Total test coverage: 100% (299/299)

go switchers to go1.23.6 runs the tool then switches back down to go1.22.12, or however this magic works...

---

since you commented on needing uncovered lines in report, iam kindly letting you know that it was implemented #152 and v2.12.0 already has that deployed,

---

no worries I'll fork it and fix the various issues.

feel free to contribute to this repo as well. if you are thinking on fixing slowness on windows please report back your findings. i have try making some progress on this in #157 but i still haven't nailed it down.

happy coding 🌞