[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5851?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13414724#comment-13414724
]
Bryan Pendleton commented on DERBY-5851:
----------------------------------------
Given what we've learned about the code coverage tools, do we think that this
patch
in fact increases the overall code coverage of our test suites? Or do we now
think that
we were already testing LogicalPreparedStatement40 adequately, and it is just
that
the code coverage tool was not showing us the actual coverage clearly?
> Inconsistent code coverage shown for LogicalPreparedStatement40
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-5851
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5851
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Mohamed Nufail
> Assignee: Mohamed Nufail
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: derby-5851-CPdecorator.patch
>
>
> I tried running
> org.apache.derbyTesting.functionTests.tests.jdbc4.PreparedStatementTest with
> a connectionCPDecorator in a JDBC4 environment. So this should actually run
> the test with LogicalPreparedStatement40 statements.
> But in code coverage report methods such as setNClob show no coverage in
> LogicalPreparedStatement40 class. But in PreparedStatement40 class all these
> methods are shown as covered. Actually those method calls should go to
> PreparedStatement40 through LogicalPreparedStatement40. But it is not shown
> in emma code coverage report.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
