Raising the bar on Phobos unittest coverage

Joseph Rushton Wakeling joseph.wakeling at webdrake.net
Fri Jun 21 15:29:09 PDT 2013


On 06/21/2013 09:42 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> If your minimum acceptable coverage is 92%, why list it as 85%? ????

I wasn't sure if you might allow some margin to allow for the fact that
introducing new functionality might introduce a drop in overall code coverage (I
found not all "failures" of code coverage are avoidable and not all of them are
real failures).

> The main point of the bar is so there's an automated check for when it drops.
> You don't have to manually look, which will never happen.

I just know that if every time I build Phobos I get a report that mentions that
std.somemodule has only 53% code coverage, I might start to feel an obligation
to do something about that. ;-)



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list