On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:
>
> > How similar is the format for VCov to cachegrind's? I suppose this
> > only needs a further "event" for a source line: whether there is debug info
> > or not.
>
> It's simpler than Cach
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:
> How similar is the format for VCov to cachegrind's? I suppose this
> only needs a further "event" for a source line: whether there is debug info
> or not.
It's simpler than Cachegrind's. There's no function-level information, so
no "fn=" lines. A
Hi Nick,
On Monday 04 February 2008, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> I've written an experimental Valgrind coverage tool, called VCov. To try it
> out, do this:
Cool.
Especially the debug info iterators are a very nice addition to the tool
interface.
I did not check it out yet, but will do soon.
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Benjamin Meyer wrote:
>> I've written an experimental Valgrind coverage tool, called VCov.
>
> Does it do anything callgrind can't do? Several other people
> (including me) have written similar tools only to realize after the
> fact that callgrind files are good enough and can
On Feb 4, 2008, at 12:06 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've written an experimental Valgrind coverage tool, called VCov.
> To try it
> out, do this:
>
>svn co svn://svn.valgrind.org/valgrind/branches/VCOV
>
> Then build in the usual way (see the README file). To run it, use
>
Hi,
I've written an experimental Valgrind coverage tool, called VCov. To try it
out, do this:
svn co svn://svn.valgrind.org/valgrind/branches/VCOV
Then build in the usual way (see the README file). To run it, use 'valgrind
--tool=exp-vcov '.
It's pretty simple. It just records, for each l
