[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: User extensions

From: Stefano Lattarini
Subject: Re: User extensions
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 13:36:16 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.30-2-686; KDE/4.4.4; i686; ; )

Hello Pippijn.

On Saturday 13 November 2010, Pippijn van wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 08:18:44PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Ideally, I would like to see testsuite coverage for each code path
> > ("branch coverage") for new code.  I understand that only Stefano is
> > able to produce this in reasonable amount of time, so whatever you guys
> > can manage is better than nothing.
> Hi,
> not having followed the code discussion very closely (just hoping it will
> be in git, soon, so I can start using it, as I have been waiting for
> something like this for a long time), I just wonder what you mean by
> "branch coverage". If this is execution graph node coverage, then I
> agree, but if you mean edge coverage, I don't know how you want to
> achieve this. Any O(x) where x>1 algorithm anywhere in the code makes it
> impossible.

> If I'm wrong, I'd like to know how Stefano produces it.
Well, basically by hand.

I think that Ralf was just saying that, since I'm familiar with the
automake testsuite and interested in extending it, since I presently
have definitely more time to do so than Ralf has, and, above all,
since there's no other regular contributor to automake ATM, if someone
is able to add proper testing for the new feature, that's either me or
the original contributor of the feature (Valentin David).

But it's not like I have a "silver bullet" to write proper tests
which attain complete branch coverage; I just proceed by "common
sense", trying to maximize such coverage.  That's all, sadly.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]