Adam Heath wrote:
Adrian Crum wrote:
Adam Heath wrote:
Scott Gray wrote:
On 11/12/2009, at 6:41 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
Scott Gray wrote:
Hi Adam,
Looking at the results my first impression is that the coverage is
under-reported. For example, the accounting component has quite a few
tests but no coverage is shown at all (except for the test package
itself). Possibly because there is lot of logic in simple methods but
I'm 100% sure java code is also run during the tests.
But still a great start and something that will be immensely useful if
we can up the accuracy a bit.
Well, it doesn't, really. If you click thru to accounting.test,
you'll see that there aren't really that many tests. And, upon
further investigation, the lines after the runSync calls aren't run,
due to some exception most likely. I'm not certian if this is do to
my changes, or if the tests themselves are broken. I'm running a
plain test run now to check that. Plus, there actually *is* line hits
in accounting.invoice.
The tests seem to be running fine on buildbot
(http://ci.apache.org/waterfall?show=ofbiz-trunk), I'm guessing it's the
test run problem that's causing the under reporting. There may not be
that many explicit accounting tests (even though it is a lot compared to
other components) but a lot of tests also touch accounting
indirectly. There is just no way that only 53 lines of java code are
being executed
in accounting during the full test run. I know for a fact that code is
executed from PaymentGatewayServices, FinAccountPaymentServices,
PaymentWorker, UtilAccounting and a few others during the tests.
I had some other changes in that tree that were causing tests to fail.
I've rerun it now, all current tests pass, and I've uploaded a new
report to http://www.brainfood.com/ofbiz-coverage
Oops, link doesn't work.
http://www.brainfood.com/ofbiz-coverage/
I like the holiday-themed colors. It would be cool if incomplete
coverage could be displayed as partially eaten sugar cookies.
