On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 06:33:40AM -0400, James E Keenan wrote: > On Sep 13, 2007, at 2:14 AM, Joshua ben Jore wrote: > > >Do you know of any addons to the cover program to use information like > >"this method call site always resolves to the following destinations"
I don't collect any information about where sub calls go to or come from, although I can't immediately think of any reason why that data shouldn't be collected. I'm not yet sure how well that would fit under the coverage umbrella, but I'm mostly watching England getting splattered by SA at the moment, so I'm not really thinking particularly analytically. > >or "if execution went through this part, what else probably happened?" Most of the infrastructure is in place for path coverage, but the data isn't collected at the moment. > Sorry, I don't know of any extensions. I haven't even had to master > all the command-line options to 'cover' yet, because it meets my > needs so well. This seems to be a bit of a problem. Since Michael Carman did such a good job with the HTML report no one has felt much of a need to scratch any coverage itches. There is an svk annotation, which will finger whoever checked in that uncovered code, but I don't know of any others having been written. There's also a nice compilation report from Denis Howe which outputs coverage errors like compiler errors so you can jump to them in your editor. I've started on a sort report to provide an optimal test ordering, so that you can do the majority of your testing as soon as possible, or identify tests which don't add to your coverage, but this isn't finished yet. -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
