On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Ray Chen <clrayc...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it is EMMA's report.
I was able to figure out that. > Maybe we should find a place to put > these reports. So we can know exactly what test coverage rate we have > got for each module It's the integration into the build system that's of interest. > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Nathan Beyer (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> [ >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6420?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12802604#action_12802604 >> ] >> >> Nathan Beyer commented on HARMONY-6420: >> --------------------------------------- >> >> I'm curious about how you gathered the coverage data? That would a valuable >> contribution on it's own. >> >>> [test] Increase the method coverage rate for unit test >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Key: HARMONY-6420 >>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6420 >>> Project: Harmony >>> Issue Type: Test >>> Components: Classlib >>> Affects Versions: 5.0M12 >>> Reporter: Jim Yu >>> Fix For: 5.0M13 >>> >>> Attachments: baseline-report.zip, Result-report.zip >>> >>> >>> I recently generated a coverage report for Harmony trunk and would like to >>> contribute more test cases to increase the method coverage rate for it. >>> Currently, these patches are made for the main modules as below. After >>> applying these patches, the average method coverage rate for these modules >>> can reach 90% above. I also attached the reports of the baseline and the >>> result with patches. >>> java.io >>> java.lang >>> java.lang.instrument >>> java.lang.reflect >>> javax.print.* >>> java.net >>> java.util >>> javax.sql.* >>> javax.acessibility >> >> -- >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >> - >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. >> >> > > > > -- > Regards, > > Ray Chen >
