I don't understand why the dual flags, but I would not make it a proper compiler flag because there are some static clinit inits in compiler classes that need to know whether coverage is enabled when the classes are loaded.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:13 PM, <skybr...@google.com> wrote: > > http://gwt-code-reviews.**appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/** > dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/**dev/jjs/**JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java<http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java> > File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/**dev/jjs/**JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java > (right): > > http://gwt-code-reviews.**appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/** > dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/**dev/jjs/**JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java#** > newcode301<http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java#newcode301> > dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/**dev/jjs/**JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java:** > 301: > > boolean enableCoverage = Boolean.getBoolean("gwt.**coverage.enable") && > Hmm, why require two properties to be set? What are your plans? > > I wonder if we should make this a proper compiler flag? That is, add a > subinterface to JJSOptions. > > http://gwt-code-reviews.**appspot.com/1786805/<http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/> > > -- > http://groups.google.com/**group/Google-Web-Toolkit-**Contributors<http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors> > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
