To modify code coverage software to handle this situation? LZ
Joern Huxhorn-2 wrote: > > Hi everybody. > > I was wondering if somebody has found a solution for the problem that > logging - in general, not just using Logback - lowers the coverage of > application code because code after > > if(logger.isDebugEnabled()) > > is either executed or not, but not both, by the tests. > > It would be necessary to execute every test-method twice: once logging > ALL and once logging OFF. > > Ignoring cases like that is not the solution because it can actually > happen that a bug is enclosed or caused by such an if scope. > > It once happened that a variable was initialized inside of a larger > if(logger.isDebugEnabled()) by mistake. > This resulted in a behavior where everything worked until the logging > level of that class was raised from DEBUG to INFO - which was a little > bit nasty because everything would work again after lowering the level > to DEBUG to look what's wrong... :p > > Does anyone have a good idea (or even a solution) how to tackle that > problem? > > Regards, Joern. > _______________________________________________ > Logback-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user > > ----- -- Lukas Zapletal http://lukas.zapletalovi.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Logging-and-test-coverage-tp21974373p22205571.html Sent from the Logback User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Logback-user mailing list [email protected] http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
