Yeah don't get too hung up on the numbers... I'm just very glad this project has unit tests for its own api...... well, it is unit tests based....so kudos there...
Some of the "coverage" tools have problems with the try catch blocks.... and sometimes its very difficult to recreate an error to "fall" into the catch block just for the test. The programmer will 1. change the code to remove the catch or just flat out throw everything. or 2) spend SO MUCH time on getting the "coverage" or getting the test to work and thus increasing the coverage. The end result is that the time spent is not worth it just to ensure all code is tested... For an open-source project with few developers as this, I would say 30 to 50% coverage would be OK. For say....a NASA, Heart Monitor, etc, then 100% coverage.. is a must... Good job on the results though. Hey BTW, hello to all. I'm a programmer in st. louis, mo. See Ya, Nick Neuberger > -----Original Message----- > From: Vivek Venugopalan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Jwebunit-development] Re: Code coverage reports for > JWebUnit > > > Jim > > Yes 80% was a surprise. But I agree with you on the > actual % not being a big thing as compared to what is > being covered. jWebUnit will be goverened by the > 80:20 rule as like anybody else. ie probably 20% of > our code is the critical path. > > So is the 80% coverage really the "ideal" 80% is the > question. I think the answer is yes. The tool > actually lets you drill down up the source code line > level. So one gets to see what did not get covered. > I liked what I saw (some getters, setters etc) > > In any case, the tool is open source so I will > integrate the whole thing and publish this weekend. > That way, everybody can view the results. > > Regards > Vivek > > --- James E Weaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Well, > > > > That's a good percentage - a bit better than I would > > have expected. > > Application of a test coverage tool is nice - > > presumably it can drill down > > on the packages a bit more and show us where the > > misses mostly are. The > > Pseudo Server borrowed from jWebUnit is a pain to > > maintain a copy of, but > > it did allow for pretty easy to read and thorough > > testing. A simpler > > alternative to the pseudo server was another item on > > my todo list ages ago. > > > > Good going vivek. > > > > We just had a thread on a TW development list about > > "what percentage of > > coverage is good coverage". Most leaned towards > > 90-something, but one of > > my favorite posts was this one by Mike Two (I don't > > think he'll mind me > > quoting him here): > > > > "Attaching any particular number is a waste of time. > > Use your head, be > > pragmatic and measure coverage often. When you do > > measure it don't worry > > about the number, worry about the trends. Do some > > analysis to figure out > > what is or isn't getting covered and make some > > decisions about it. > > > > Be afraid of rules like, "we must have 95% > > coverage". Measurement of a > > system changes the system. Since catch blocks are > > frequently mentioned as a > > problem and not so easy to test a lazy developer may > > start writing "catch > > (Exception)" so that they only have one untested > > catch block. Or moving the > > catch block higher up the method stack or writing > > long methods with one big > > try catch to keep the percentages of covered code > > up. > > > > I've seen projects with 30% coverage and almost no > > bugs, I've seen projects > > with 90% coverage and a ton of bugs. Your tests can > > cover everything and > > still suck. Run coverage once in a while, ignore the > > percentage number and > > look for trends in namespaces and classes that > > aren't covered." > > > > Jim > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation > > Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source > > Desktop Event. > > GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, > > 28-30th June in Norway > > http://2004/guadec.org > > _______________________________________________ > > Jwebunit-development mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jwebunit-development > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. > http://messenger.yahoo.com/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation > Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event. > GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway > http://2004/guadec.org > _______________________________________________ > Jwebunit-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jwebunit-development > - - - - - - This e-mail message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity identified in the alias address of this message and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message from your system. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X. >From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 _______________________________________________ Jwebunit-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jwebunit-development
