Dorian =?utf-8?q?Péron?= <[email protected]>,
Dorian =?utf-8?q?Péron?= <[email protected]>,
Dorian =?utf-8?q?Péron?= <[email protected]>,
Dorian =?utf-8?q?Péron?= <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <llvm.org/llvm/llvm-project/pull/[email protected]>
================
@@ -2604,6 +2604,15 @@ void CoverageMappingModuleGen::emit() {
};
auto CovDataHeaderTy =
llvm::StructType::get(Ctx, ArrayRef(CovDataHeaderTypes));
+
+ // By default, clang instruments the code for "statement" and "branch"
----------------
evodius96 wrote:
I know what you're getting at with "Statement", but LLVM uses "Region
Coverage", which is more-or-less the same thing (as regions are created
according to statement scopes, etc). I think this extension ought to follow
that convention by also referring to "Region Coverage".
Of course, "regions" also facilitates other metrics: line coverage, function
coverage, and branch coverage, all together (with MC/DC with another option).
I'm OK with limiting your extension to "Region", "Branch", and "MCDC".
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158059
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
