Actually not too bad :).

https://dlang.dawg.eu/coverage/
https://coveralls.io/r/MartinNowak/dmd

On 11/27/14 3:32 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
> Actually not too bad :).
>
> https://dlang.dawg.eu/coverage/
> https://coveralls.io/r/MartinNowak/dmd

Wow, coveralls.io looks pretty nice! -- Andrei

On 11/27/2014 3:32 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
> Actually not too bad :).
>
> https://dlang.dawg.eu/coverage/
> https://coveralls.io/r/MartinNowak/dmd

The backend coverage is poor because I relied on the DMC test suite to deal with that. 70% is better than I expected.

90% for the front end isn't good enough. I'd like to be at 98% or so.

Thanks for doing this, and the online reports look very nice!

On 11/27/2014 3:32 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
> Actually not too bad :).
>
> https://dlang.dawg.eu/coverage/
> https://coveralls.io/r/MartinNowak/dmd

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13786

On 11/28/2014 01:12 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 11/27/14 3:32 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
>> Actually not too bad :).
>>
>> https://dlang.dawg.eu/coverage/
>> https://coveralls.io/r/MartinNowak/dmd
>
> Wow, coveralls.io looks pretty nice! -- Andrei

And there is actually D support to upload dmd coverage reports.
http://code.dlang.org/packages/doveralls

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:28:45PM -0800, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 11/27/2014 3:32 AM, Martin Nowak wrote:
> >Actually not too bad :).
> >
> >https://dlang.dawg.eu/coverage/ https://coveralls.io/r/MartinNowak/dmd
> 
> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13786

How do I locally test dmd for coverage? I have a fix for the missing coverage for version.c, but I can't figure out how to test whether it's actually working.


T

-- 
Prosperity breeds contempt, and poverty breeds consent. -- Suck.com

"H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d"  wrote in message news:mailman.2389.1417136212.9932.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...

> How do I locally test dmd for coverage? I have a fix for the missing
> coverage for version.c, but I can't figure out how to test whether it's
> actually working.

What I do is put a print/assert in the compiler functions you're looking for and then run it on the test case. 

On 11/27/2014 4:54 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> How do I locally test dmd for coverage? I have a fix for the missing
> coverage for version.c, but I can't figure out how to test whether it's
> actually working.

In posix.mak for dmd, there's 'make gcov' to generate coverage data.

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 09:05:16PM -0800, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 11/27/2014 4:54 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >How do I locally test dmd for coverage? I have a fix for the missing coverage for version.c, but I can't figure out how to test whether it's actually working.
> 
> In posix.mak for dmd, there's 'make gcov' to generate coverage data.

I get a whole bunch of errors that say 'cannot open notes file'.  What does that mean?

Also, don't I have to first compile dmd with --coverage and run the test suite before it has the coverage data??


T

-- 
Give me some fresh salted fish, please.

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:32:25AM -0800, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 09:05:16PM -0800, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > On 11/27/2014 4:54 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > >How do I locally test dmd for coverage? I have a fix for the missing coverage for version.c, but I can't figure out how to test whether it's actually working.
> > 
> > In posix.mak for dmd, there's 'make gcov' to generate coverage data.
> 
> I get a whole bunch of errors that say 'cannot open notes file'.  What does that mean?
> 
> Also, don't I have to first compile dmd with --coverage and run the test suite before it has the coverage data??
[...]

Which I had tried (make -f posix.mak -j6 MODEL=64 CFLAGS=--coverage), but the compilation aborts with:

	inifile.c:101:3: error: #error SYSCONFDIR not defined

which goes away when --coverage is not specified. What gives?


T

-- 
If creativity is stifled by rigid discipline, then it is not true creativity.