Should the coverage calculation consider all source directories
(including those added by the build-helper plugin) or just the main
source directory?  The default scanner (i.e., DirectoryScanner)
includes all source directories.

Daniel

On Aug 26, 11:17 am, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah, if it is on src/main/flex is must be take into coverage calculation.
>
> VELO
>
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Daniel Teixeira
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > Do you mean you want to include files that are not in the compiled swf
> > link report?
>
> > On Aug 26, 10:34 am, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I was thinking, may be the best approach is scan files, so I can use the
> > > include directive to ensure coverage on this inclusion classes....
>
> > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Daniel Teixeira
> > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > For the same reason Jesse mentioned above.
>
> > > > Quoted from Jesse earlier in this thread:
>
> > > > "The key point in the sample (so that you don't have to open it to
> > > > understand
> > > > the problem) is that it contains a class file with an AS3 include
> > > > directive.
> > > >  Ie, the structure is as follows:
>
> > > >   - src/main/flex
> > > >      - App.as (uses an "include" to bring in sampleInclude.as)
> > > >      - sampleInclude.as
>
> > > > With the packaging set to swf, and the sourceFile set to App.as, the
> > > > "compile" operation performs correctly.  However, "test" attempts to
> > > > compile
> > > > both App.as and sampleInclude.as separately.  This fails, as
> > > > sampleInclude.as is only intended to be included in other files (never
> > > > compiled by itself directly)."
>
> > > > On Aug 26, 10:24 am, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > Just to remind me, why shouldn't it compile all files?
>
> > > > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Daniel Teixeira
> > > > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hi Jesse/VELO,
> > > > > > Any updates with the link report scanner?  I encountered this same
> > > > > > issue so I decided to write a LinkReportScanner that extends the
> > > > > > existing functionality of the DirectoryScanner and adds the ability
> > to
> > > > > > just include the as/mxml files that are specified in the link
> > report
> > > > > > (as discussed in this thread).  It's a simple solution but it
> > works.
> > > > > > I will attach the changes to the issue ticket if you guys haven't
> > > > > > already started working on an "official" solution.
>
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Daniel
>
> > > > > > On Jul 27, 4:11 pm, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > Sure, I will apply it right away.... I may got to the file thing
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > > future, but for sure not gonna happen anytime soon, so it is
> > likely
> > > > your
> > > > > > > change will be there for ever =D
>
> > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Jesse Sightler <
> > > > > > [email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I don't really see how it would be slower than reading and
> > parsing
> > > > > > hundreds
> > > > > > > > (if not thousands) of separate files.  It also brings in the
> > issue
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > parsing as code to accurately determine if it  includes
> > classes.
>
> > > > > > > > Honestly, I'd greatly prefer a link-report based solution to
> > > > something
> > > > > > > > based on guessing the files used.  I don't really care about
> > > > coverage
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > files that aren't in the SWF anyway. :)  Really, I could see
> > where
> > > > some
> > > > > > > > people would prefer to have both options available to them.
>
> > > > > > > > If I send a prototype of this approach (link-report parsing),
> > would
> > > > it
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > likely to get considered for inclusion?
>
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Jess
>
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Marvin Froeder <
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >> link-report would be more accurate (I guess), but it would be
> > > > slower
> > > > > > > >> (parsing xml) and still my left classes behind..... test code
> > > > coverage
> > > > > > > >> should check coverage of all classes, not only the used by the
> > > > > > APP.....
>
> > > > > > > >> This advanced scanner (as a configurable thing) I'm more
> > willing
> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> include on flexmojos.
>
> > > > > > > >> VELO
>
> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Jesse Sightler <
> > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > >> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >>> I think that could work for most cases.  I'm wondering,
> > though...
> > > > > > would
> > > > > > > >>> that actually be easier than a link-report scanner?  It seems
> > > > like
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > >>> would be the most accurate way to do it.
>
> > > > > > > >>> In any case, I do think that it would work for us.  It would
> > > > force us
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >>> remove some non-compilable class files, but I don't really
> > see
> > > > that
> > > > > > as a bad
> > > > > > > >>> thing. :)
>
> > > > > > > >>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >>> Jess
>
> > > > > > > >>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Marvin Froeder <
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >>>> Ithink a better approach would be an advanced class
> > scanner...
> > > > that
> > > > > > > >>>> checks if the .as file is a class, probably just check for
> > class
> > > > > > keyword
> > > > > > > >>>> presence....
>
> > > > > > > >>>> What do you think?
>
> > > > > > > >>>> Sent from DROID
>
> > > > > > > >>>> Em 26/07/2010 23:09, "Jesse Sightler" <
> > [email protected]
> > > > > > > >>>> >escreveu:
>
> > > > > > > >>>> LOL, that is fine.  At least the attached patch there gets
> > us
> > > > past
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > > >>>> problem for now.
>
> > > > > > > >>>> We look forward to seeing a more official solution as well.
> > :)
>
> > > > > > > >>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >>>> Jess
>
> > > > > > > >>>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Marvin Froeder <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > >>>> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >>>>> > You did convinced me this need an different approach, you
> > > > just
> > > > > > didn't
> > > > > > > >>>>> convinced me that the sugg...
>
> > > > > > > >>>>>  --
>
> > > > > > > >>>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to
> > the
> > > > > > Google
> > > > > > > >>>>> > Groups "Flex Mojos" group.
> > > > > > > >>>>> > ...
>
> > > > > > > >>>> --
> > > > > > > >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> > > > Google
> > > > > > > >>>> Groups "Flex Mojos" group.
> > > > > > > >>>> To...
>
> > > > > > > >>>>  --
> > > > > > > >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> > > > Google
> > > > > > > >>>> Groups "Flex Mojos" group.
> > > > > > > >>>> To post to this group, send email to
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > >>>> [email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > > >>>> For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/flex-mojos
>
> > > > > > > >>>>http://flexmojos.sonatype.org/
>
> > > > > > > >>>  --
> > > > > > > >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> > > > Google
> > > > > > > >>> Groups "Flex Mojos" group.
> > > > > > > >>> To post to this group, send email to
> > [email protected]
> > > > > > > >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > >>> [email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > > >>> For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > >>>http://groups.google.com/group/flex-mojos
>
> > > > > > > >>>http://flexmojos.sonatype.org/
>
> > > > > > > >>  --
> > > > > > > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> > Google
> > > > > > > >> Groups "Flex Mojos" group.
> > > > > > > >> To post to this group, send email to
> > [email protected]
> > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > >> [email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
> > <flex-mojos%[email protected]<flex-mojos%[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/flex-mojos
>
> > > > > > > >>http://flexmojos.sonatype.org/
>
> > > > > > > >  --
> > > > > > > > You received this
>
> ...
>
> read more »

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Flex Mojos" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/flex-mojos

http://flexmojos.sonatype.org/

Reply via email to