On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 08:49:44AM -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> I was tasked with working on code coverage for a large project, but had
> difficulty getting Devel::Cover to run. We had Devel::NYTProf handy,
> and I realized that although that tool focuses on profiling, it produces
> data that appears that it can be used for code coverage instead.
>
> Having one tool that could be used for both profiling and code coverage
> seems like a nice win. Have other people looked into using
> Devel::NYTProf this way? Is there a reason why it would be undesirable?
> Is Devel::Cover still the go-to tool for code coverage?
Devel::Cover tells you a lot more than just whether a line of code was
executed. Consider a line like this:
do_something if($foo || $bar);
Devel::Cover will tell you which of the three possible conditions were
covered by your tests, those being:
* neither $foo nor $bar are true;
* $foo is false, $bar is true;
* $foo is true and we don't care about $bar
I'm surprised that you can bet NYTProf working but not Cover - in my
experience, they either both work easily or both fail horribly.
--
David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig
Vegetarian: n: a person who, due to malnutrition caused by
poor lifestyle choices, is eight times more likely to
catch TB than a normal person
