On Monday, March 18, 2013 17:34:12 Martin Nowak wrote: > On 03/18/2013 02:00 AM, Walter Bright wrote: > > From now on, I'd like such unittest coverage (and justification for low > > > > coverage) to be part of the minimum standard for all new phobos modules. > > Great. > > > $(DMD) -cov=83 -unittest -main -run std\file.d > > Can someone look into std.file's unittests. They use 60% (32s/50s) of > the unittest RUNtime on my machine.
My first guess would be that you're running a different OS from Walter and that OS-specific code counts as not being run when you run it on a different OS. If that's the case, std.file is doomed to have lower code coverage because of the larger-than-average percentage of it which is OS-specific. The coverage should still be looked into and improved where possible, but Linux code is clearly never going to run on Windows or vice versa. - Jonathan M Davis
