This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Mauve project.
Re: Mauve Code Coverage
- From: Yan Georget <yan dot georget at koalog dot com>
- To: Stephen Crawley <crawley at dstc dot edu dot au>
- Cc: mauve-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 10:49:31 +0200
- Subject: Re: Mauve Code Coverage
- Organization: Koalog
- References: <200306260028.h5Q0SUSa026353@piglet.dstc.edu.au>
- Reply-to: yan dot georget at koalog dot com
> I think this is a good idea in principle. But a better idea would be
> for you to run the coverage tool on Mauve/Classpath/some VM and post the
> results. If you could set something up to do this automatically, that
> would be even better!
Not sure, it is much more rewarding for developpers (here, test writers) to
run the code coverage themselves than letting a quality engineer (here,
Koalog) do it for them.
> Another point is that coverage testing will only really help if people
> volunteer to write good test cases to fill in the gaps.
That's the point. See above.
> Finally, coverage testing won't tell us about test cases that are
> incorrect; e.g. ones that test for implementation specific behavior, or
> ones that don't work against various Sun JDK's. In other words, Mauve's
> limitations are not just restricted to coverage.
In a usual projet, you check that all the test pass under several environments
(OS and JDK). In your case, you would also check that the coverage results
are the same under these environments.
Computing the code coverage is indeed a simple but powerful way to test the
tests, which is exactly what you want to do here.
What do you think?