Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-21 Thread Tels
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Moin, On 21-Oct-01 Paul Johnson tried to scribble about: > I keep getting hit by things that think I am running Micros~1 stuff :-( Those worms, again. *sigh* > Looks like you have it now, but let me know if that's not the case. Since I am constantly developi

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-21 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 07:31:20PM +0200, Tels wrote: > On 21-Oct-01 Paul Johnson tried to scribble about: > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:42:33PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:07:26AM -0600, chromatic wrote: > >> > > - Of those covered, a smidge less than half hav

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-21 Thread Tels
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Moin, On 21-Oct-01 Paul Johnson tried to scribble about: > On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 07:40:11PM +0200, Tels wrote: > >> Thank you for your work! I looked at BigFloat.pm, noticed a untested >> line >> in facmp(), added tests and lo and behold, there was a bug! >>

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-21 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 07:40:11PM +0200, Tels wrote: > Thank you for your work! I looked at BigFloat.pm, noticed a untested line > in facmp(), added tests and lo and behold, there was a bug! (bacmp(5,+inf) > returned 1 but should return -1 ;) Hah! It was all worth it :-) > Wow ;) Indeed. --

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-21 Thread Tels
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Moin, On 21-Oct-01 Paul Johnson tried to scribble about: > I ran this last night, and supply the results here without comment save: Thank you for your work! I looked at BigFloat.pm, noticed a untested line in facmp(), added tests and lo and behold, there was

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-21 Thread Tels
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Moin, On 21-Oct-01 Paul Johnson tried to scribble about: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:42:33PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:07:26AM -0600, chromatic wrote: >> > > - Of those covered, a smidge less than half have < 75% statement >

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-21 Thread Paul Johnson
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:42:33PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:07:26AM -0600, chromatic wrote: > > > - Of those covered, a smidge less than half have < 75% statement coverage. - " > > >" " , 20% have < 50% statement coverage. > > > > Is it possible to ge

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-20 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 10:37:01PM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote: > By the way, I got rid of perl-qa-metrics. It's basically dead, right? Basically. -- Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-20 Thread Paul Johnson
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:42:33PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:07:26AM -0600, chromatic wrote: > > > - Of those covered, a smidge less than half have < 75% statement coverage. - " > > >" " , 20% have < 50% statement coverage. > > > > Is it possible to ge

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:07:26AM -0600, chromatic wrote: > > - Of those covered, a smidge less than half have < 75% statement coverage. - " > >" " , 20% have < 50% statement coverage. > > Is it possible to get an update on this? Writing a new test from > scratch is generally harder t

Re: Preliminary test coverage analysis

2001-10-17 Thread chromatic
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "schwern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Going back eight months, this was the state of things. Schwern had just added coverage analysis to Test::Harness: > - A bit less than half of all the core libraries have no coverage at all. > > Some very important things are