On Jun 21, 2005, at 5:59 PM, Geoffrey Young wrote:
This seems unfortunate for at least two reasons:
1) it ends up taking a really long time to run the tests. At some
point, maybe long enough that nightly tests become prohibitive (even
more so for continuous integration).
We have a substa
On Jun 21, 2005, at 1:09 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
It seems to me like the time Devel::Cover takes to do its
book-keeping when a process terminates is linear in the total number
of files in the cover_db, rather than linear in the number of files
involved in that
On Jun 14, 2005, at 1:32 PM, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
A little more interesting information. I ran a coverage test for the
full code base. Then I did this:
[kevin]% time perl -MDevel::Cover -e 1
...
perl -MDevel::Cover -e 1 14.19s user 0.88s system 79% cpu 18.997 total
After spending
prevent it, but it seems like this ought to take pretty close to no
time at all.
A little information about the database:
[kevin]% ls cover_db/structure | wc -l
599
[kevin]% ls cover_db/runs | wc -l
46
-kevin
On Jun 14, 2005, at 11:27 AM, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
It seems to me like
It seems to me like the time Devel::Cover takes to do its book-keeping
when a process terminates is linear in the total number of files in the
cover_db, rather than linear in the number of files involved in that
particular process.
This means that as your code base grows, the time to run unit
On Jun 3, 2005, at 1:40 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Certainly. Of course, it's always possible and quite likely that there
is a bug in my code somewhere. But there is also a chance that I am
conflating two ops, since I have yet to come up with a way to uniquely
identify an op (suggestions welcome
On Jun 2, 2005, at 3:48 AM, Dave Paris wrote:
Greetings,
It was brought to my attention that Crypt::DES is included in the
Phalanx 100 list. While I'm flattered, I think this should be
replaced by a better symmetrical crypto module like Crypt::Rijndael.
The reasoning is simple. Crypt::DE
On Jun 1, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 04:00:12PM -0700, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has to
be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
You might find it slightly easie
On Jun 1, 2005, at 2:35 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has
to be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
stmt branch cond sub time code
221862 10
On Jun 1, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
If you look at the subroutine coverage page, it claims that there is a
BEGIN block uncovered at that line.
That does sound a little strange. Are you able to produce an example
showing this problem?
No. In fact, it isn't consistent. Last n
I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has to
be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
stmt branch cond sub time code
221862 100 100 _1613639 next if ($line
=~ /^\s*[#!]/ || $line =~ /^\s*$
On May 23, 2005, at 7:08 AM, Ian Langworth wrote:
The test is happy when I run
it normally, and even when I run it under Devel::Cover, but it
consistently fails in our nightly test run (under Devel::Cover). As
best I can figure, Devel::Cover is slowing things down so much that my
test think
I recently had to deal with a bug where under certain circumstances a
server process would never terminate, but would block indefinitely in
the shutdown process. Being a good coder, I wrote a unit test to
reproduce the problem before I fixed it. The test is happy when I run
it normally, and e
On Apr 14, 2005, at 12:43 AM, suresh babu wrote:
Hi Experts,
I would like to reiterate my request. For our students i need these
projects. Basically i want some open source projects and their test
suits(developed using perl). We would like to use these projects as
case studies to demonstrate tes
On Apr 12, 2005, at 3:58 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
How do you test that a variable has been tied to a class?
I looked through Test::More; the term 'tie' is conspicuous by its
absence. I also searched the archives of this list and couldn't
locate anything.
I'm looking for something along the lin
Anyone seen this message with Readonly running under Devel::Cover:
Invalid tie at (eval
22)[/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/Readonly.pm:338] line 9
It's a little spooky... my tests used to be fine, but then I made a
couple innocuous changes in one test file (changing log levels) and I
star
Following up on this for the sake of archives...
Ultimately, I found that when I upgraded Storable to 1.13 this stopped
happening. This seems to be true regardless of whether Devel::Cover
uses the lock_ versions of the Storable subroutines, although that may
be just luck.
-kevin
On Dec 14, 2004, at 2:10 PM, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
On Tue 14 Dec 2004 21:49, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's what I have to say about clever bracing/spacing styles.
Your bracing/spacing style should not be a detriment. It should not
be a limitation. If common editors have trou
On Dec 9, 2004, at 2:32 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 02:06:39PM -0800, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
My latest theory was that my forked processes were stomping on each
other and corrupting the stored data structure. So I replaced the
calls to nstore and retrieve with lock_nstore
On Dec 9, 2004, at 11:21 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Whether this is related to your main problem I can't tell, though I
have
have seen that warning plenty of times before but never encountered
your
main problem.
Yeah, it's probably unrelated.
My latest theory was that my forked processes were stomp
On Dec 9, 2004, at 10:16 AM, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
Hmm... if there were two versions of Storable installed, and
Devel::Cover initially found one, and then later IPC::Shareable
somehow caused the other to be loaded instead, that might cause
this... I will go investigate that possibility
On Dec 9, 2004, at 9:50 AM, Steve Peters wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:34:18AM -0800, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
My unit test suite recently started spitting out this error when run
under Devel::Cover. It runs normally and successfully without. Has
anyone seen this before:
Magic number
My unit test suite recently started spitting out this error when run
under Devel::Cover. It runs normally and successfully without. Has
anyone seen this before:
Magic number checking on storable file failed at ../../lib/Storable.pm
(autosplit into ../../lib/auto/Storable/_retrieve.al) line
I'm wondering if I'm the only one who would love to see
Devel::Cover::Regex? Many (most?) perl programs are pretty regex
heavy, and if we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that each
regex is actually a program in itself. You can try to throw lots of
inputs at it and hope that you we
On Oct 2, 2004, at 12:36 PM, Geoffrey Young wrote:
we use Apache-Test, which starts the server, runs the tests, and shuts
down
the server again.
When I last talked with you about Apache-Test, I seem to recall that
you said that it was restricted to running the tests serially. Is this
still tr
On Sep 21, 2004, at 1:30 PM, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
So, I don't expect anyone to try to figure out this stack trace stuff,
but I'm curious if other people have seen stability problems like
this? Alternatively, if someone can tell me the exact logistics of
how they get the coverage
On Sep 21, 2004, at 2:58 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
The current version of Devel::Cover asserts that running it on a
mod_perl server ought to be as simple as adding 'use Devel::Cover' to
your startup script. However, when I do this,
The current version of Devel::Cover asserts that running it on a
mod_perl server ought to be as simple as adding 'use Devel::Cover' to
your startup script. However, when I do this, I get the following
failure:
Syntax error on line 1225 of /home/kevin/.../conf/httpd.conf:
Can't use an undefined
On Sep 16, 2004, at 2:47 PM, Tels wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Thursday 16 September 2004 23:37, Geoffrey Young wrote:
hi paul :)
I think this has come up before, but I'm not sure what the resolution
was.
I just came across (production) code that looks like this:
return 1 if
29 matches
Mail list logo
