On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Ian C <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I have discovered the Emma code coverage tool that integrates very >> well into my Eclipse. ( http://www.eclemma.org/index.html ) >> > > Cool. I see there is a plugin for Maven as well: > http://mojo.codehaus.org/emma-maven-plugin/
Ah, I didn't see that. It will be an great addition. > > So this might be something we can automated as an (optional) part of the > build. > >> I ran the coverage on the Juint tests for the Simple API and the ODFDOM. >> Summary is, pretty good coverage on Simple - 79 % line coverage, 84% method, >> not so on ODFDOM (probably because it is huge by comparison) - 24% >> line and 10% method. >> >> Not sure how to get them to anyone that is interested. They are in >> 800K and a 10M zipped files. >> I was going to upload then to my ISP web site but my access seems to >> be down at the moment. >> > > Is there any easy way to extract only the uncovered Simple functions? > That might be small enough to post in an email. I will check it out - or maybe just post process the output. The full thing is very good and worth looking at. > >> Something like the output would be a great thing to generate on each >> build and make generally available. >> Track the history of coverage of tests etc. >> >> I intend to generate tests to cover the missing sections of Simple ( >> but don't hold your breath waiting) and then think about tests for >> ODFDOM. > > > Increasing Simple coverage should also increase ODFDOM coverage, up to a > point. > >> I suspect we can auto generate many of the ODFDOM tests required. Just >> a different set of velocity templates. >> >> There are also a lot of depricated methods in the ODFDOM. Will they be >> removed at some point? >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> Ian C -- Cheers, Ian C
