On 7/1/2005 7:39 AM, demerphq wrote:
On 6/30/05, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yves has some controversial ideas about what is and is not data structure
equivalence. I'd like comments on it.
Well while im disappointed that its considered to be a controversial
position (why is
On 12/14/2004 6:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So even when you approach 100% there's still bugs to be found with simple
coverage analysis.
I think this is the most valuable part of the exercise - the bugs you find
when you think 'its got 98% coverage, there
On 7/15/2004 4:28 PM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
I can see from the testers page that Devel::Cover is supposed to work on
Windows.
I can confirm that it does.
Is there a ppd distribution of it somewhere so I can install it on
ActivePerl without a compiler ?
Not AFAIK, certainly not from
this situation,
[...] Michael Carman is looking at making this more usable.
I am, but I hit a roadblock with compound conditionals.
A little background for those unfamiliar with the guts of Devel::Cover: The
.uncoverable file captures analysis data at the same level of granularity as
Devel::Cover
On 6/7/2004 11:26 AM, Geoffrey Young wrote:
The only thing I don't like about this approach is that some of the data is
available only in the tooltips, which of course don't print.
sorry I need this kind of explanation, but what are the tooltips?
When you hover the mouse over one of the
On 6/7/2004 9:20 PM, Andy Lester wrote:
The ALT attribute as tooltip thing isn't portable, though.
I don't use ALT, I use TITLE. That's the right way according to the W3C and
supported by at least IE and Mozilla-based browsers. Or did you mean something
else by isn't portable?
-mjc
On 5/27/2004 9:31 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 12:50:55PM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote:
if [a missed path] represents a condition we would explain away (D::C
limitation, or whatnot) then it would be nice to have some way to track it
within the tool itself.
It has
On 11/13/2003 5:54 PM, Ovid wrote:
--- Michael Carman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cosmetically, everything should look almost identical. Behind the scenes I've
pretty much gutted and rewritten everything. Most significantly, it no longer
requires (uses) the Template Toolkit.
Out of curiosity
On 11/11/2003 3:19 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:27:41PM +0200, Gabor Szabo wrote:
The HTML files generated by Devel::Cover are huge.
I think some work should be done to reduce this size.
Michael said he's working on this [...]
My silence on this topic is because I've
On 10/31/2003 8:08 AM, Andy Lester wrote:
Personally, I find the POD useful when I'm going thru a Devel::Cover run. I
interleave POD with functions and I like to refer to my docs.
Well, since POD is intended to be documentation (not code or even comments) it
seems reasonable to omit it from a
On 11/3/2003 12:20 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 05:33:09PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right now, if your cover_db holds data for a dozen files, but you test them
one at a time, you have to read and write *all* the coverage data (as well
as have the RAM to hold it).
On 10/25/2003 6:27 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
The HTML files generated by Devel::Cover are huge.
I'm working on it. :)
I ran coverage on HTML::Template and while the source code
is ~100K the HTML report is 2.5Mb
I did a null coverage run (I did a use HTML::Template but didn't actually do
On 10/22/2003 4:01 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 03:01:20PM -0700, Ovid wrote:
Tim Bunce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd strongly recommend switching to Storable first. It did have problems
but it's now very robust and far, far, faster than Data::Dumper+eval.
This small change
On 10/20/2003 2:41 PM, Tony Bowden wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 07:02:56PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the code has been properly designed (i.e. factored into separate
pieces without lots of ugly interdependancies) it should be
possible to run the module-level test for that piece
14 matches
Mail list logo
