On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:05:36PM -0400, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
No, that's exactly the point that Richard tries to explain to you and
you don't seem to understand. SQLite's testing coverage is a coverage
of the resulting object code, not some source code lines. And so it
Yes, I now realize that
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Pavel Ivanov paiva...@gmail.com wrote:
Dead code is indicative of a bug. Usually programmers write code only
in the expectation that it be run. The same can be said of conditions
in an if statement, and what the compiler does to it doesn't change
that.
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Sami Liedes slie...@cc.hut.fi wrote:
Note that I'm decidedly not trying to claim MC/DC coverage as a metric
* makes any sense
* is reasonable in the case of SQLite
* is ever reasonable for any program
Actually in my opinion it's probably too heavy a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/25/2011 10:40 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:
100% MC/DC has worked very, very well at finding and preventing bugs in
SQLite.
The one place it doesn't help is when error returns of functions are
ignored. For example this happens when xCurrentTime of
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:26:43PM -0400, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
if (A || 1) ...
You can get (e) by giving test cases for A and !A, but most certainly
flipping A does not independently affect the outcome as required by
the plain reading of (f).
I'm pretty sure that the latest versions
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 04:58:35AM +0300, Sami Liedes wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 09:17:43PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
--
1. Structural coverage guidelines are:
a) Every statement in the program has been invoked at least once;
b) Every point of entry and exit
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Sami Liedes slie...@cc.hut.fi wrote:
The example is a four-input AND gate with short-circuit logic (_ =
don't care/not evaluated). This would be a sufficient set of tests:
expression = (A B C D)
#A B C D Result
11 1 1 1 1
20 _ _
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
The object-code branch coverage testing of SQLite clearly fulfills
guidelines a, b, c, d, and e. The question at hand is does 100% branch
coverage fulfill f in a short-circuit language such as C/C++. Note that
the
paper
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
The object-code branch coverage testing of SQLite clearly fulfills
guidelines a, b, c, d, and e. The question at hand is does 100% branch
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Sami Liedes slie...@cc.hut.fi wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:26:43PM -0400, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
if (A || 1) ...
You can get (e) by giving test cases for A and !A, but most certainly
flipping A does not independently affect the outcome as required by
Opinions vary on the exact meaning of MC/DC for a language (such as C) that
has short-circuit boolean operators. You are advocating a more rigorous
view of MC/DC that what I have heard before. This is not to say it is
wrong, only different.
For a decision of the form:
if( A B )...
The
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 11:16:37AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
Opinions vary on the exact meaning of MC/DC for a language (such as C) that
has short-circuit boolean operators. You are advocating a more rigorous
view of MC/DC that what I have heard before. This is not to say it is
wrong, only
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Sami Liedes slie...@cc.hut.fi wrote:
For a decision of the form:
if( A B )...
The test suite for SQLite tries at least three cases:
(1) A false
(2) A true and B false
(3) A true and B true
You seem to be saying that this is
[Note: In case my explanations are not clear enough, there's a fairly
formal position paper by Certification Authorities Software Team
(CAST-10) clarifying MC/DC here:
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/air_software/cast/cast_papers/media/cast-10.pdf
]
On Fri, Sep 23,
Richard Hipp wrote:
Opinions vary on the exact meaning of MC/DC for a language (such as C) that
has short-circuit boolean operators.
snip
There are problems with this view, though. In many instances, B is
undefined when A is false. In other words, if A is false, any attempt to
calculate B
On 23 Sep 2011, at 11:30pm, Darren Duncan wrote:
This is why I think it is valuable for a programming language to provide
multiple versions of some operations such as boolean and,or where one
variant doesn't short-circuit and the other does.
The primary purpose, then, of short-circuiting
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Sami Liedes slie...@cc.hut.fi wrote:
[Note: In case my explanations are not clear enough, there's a fairly
formal position paper by Certification Authorities Software Team
(CAST-10) clarifying MC/DC here:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 09:17:43PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
--
1. Structural coverage guidelines are:
a) Every statement in the program has been invoked at least once;
b) Every point of entry and exit in the program has been invoked at least
once;
c) Every control
if (A || 1) ...
You can get (e) by giving test cases for A and !A, but most certainly
flipping A does not independently affect the outcome as required by
the plain reading of (f).
I'm pretty sure that the latest versions of modern compilers will
optimize the above if statement to the
On Sep 23, 2011, at 9:17 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
paper above completely ignores this issue. It is as if the authors had
never heard of short-circuit evaluation. Or, perhaps they are familiar with
the problem but could not reach agreement on its solution so simply didn't
bring it up.
Hi!
Looking at
http://www.sqlite.org/testing.html
it seems to me that MC/DC coverage is explained wrong there. This in
turn makes me wonder if SQLite tests really have 100% MC/DC coverage
or if this claim is just based on mistaken understanding of MC/DC.
The page explains:
21 matches
Mail list logo
