[Python-Dev] Code coverage reporting. (original) (raw)

Titus Brown titus at caltech.edu
Mon Jun 19 17🔞09 CEST 2006


On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 08:37:30AM -0400, Benji York wrote: -> Brett Cannon wrote: -> >But it does seem accurate; random checking of some modules that got high -> >but not perfect covereage all seem to be instances where dependency -> >injection would be required to get the tests to work since they were -> >based on platform-specific things. -> -> >I don't know if we need it hooked into the buildbots (unless it is dirt -> >cheap to generate the report). -> -> It would be interesting to combine the coverage over several platforms -> and report that.

Yes, I noticed that the platform specific stuff doesn't get covered, of course. It's very easy to do, if there's any way to get the coverage database from a central location (or send it back to a central location).

It might be interesting to run coverage analysis -- either figleaf or Ned Batchelder's module[0] -- once a week on select buildbot machines (one linux, one windows, one mac, or some such) and make the coverage databases available via something like a downloadable static file. Then anyone could download those files and do Interesting Things with them.

--titus

[0] I'm sorry, I don't know how Walter Dorwald generates his coverage; if it's OSS, then it'd be better to use because it shows C code coverage as well.

p.s. Here's the diff for regr_test:

Index: Lib/test/regrtest.py

--- Lib/test/regrtest.py (revision 46972) +++ Lib/test/regrtest.py (working copy) @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ #! /usr/bin/env python +import figleaf

"""Regression test.

@@ -333,7 +334,11 @@ tracer.runctx('runtest(test, generate, verbose, quiet, testdir)', globals=globals(), locals=vars()) else:



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list