On 15/09/2007, Joshua Isom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm curious about the test coverage some of the listings. There's 100% > coverage of src/pmc/compiler.pmc but 12.5% coverage of > src/pmc/compiler.c which is created from compiler.pmc. With the > inheritence of pmc's, won't that screw with the coverage reports as > well?
I'm wondering if my regular expression is incorrect, and gcov is picking up the .pmc as well as the .c files when it shouldn't be. I'm using "gcov *.c" and this probably should be "gcov *\.c" or something like that. However, yes, I agree picking up the pmc coverage will screw up the overall reports. I know that there's more refinement needed :-) > But, as a side note, when I'm working on jit, it would be very helpful > to run `make testj` or whatever and know what's being covered and what > isn't. I have had at least one instance where one or two tests > revealed an error on my part because that part of code was never > touched. What would be needed(on freebsd) to get a personal test > coverage? How does a set of targets like "make testj-cover", "make test-cover", "make fulltest-cover" etc. sound instead of just plain "make cover"? At present, on freebsd (if you're using gcc and not freebsd's cc) then you should be able to just run "make cover" and get a "personalised" test coverage for your system. Paul
