Re: New propossed GnomeGoal: Add code coverage support

[Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org>]

On 01/12/2010 03:44 AM, Philip Withnall wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 03:38 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
>> On 01/04/2010 12:53 PM, Javier Jardón wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> The objective of the GnomeGoal is to add code coverage of your code
>>> with GCOV [1]
>>> You can take a look to the GnomeGoal page here: [2] (There are also
>>> examples to add GCOV support to json-glib and libgdata)
>>
>> I was a huge fan of adding GCOV support to all modules, and actually have
>> patches for glib/pango/gtk+ in bugzilla.  But after finding out that coverage
>> can be extracted without modifying the modules (like build.gnome.org is
>> already doing), I'm against cluttering the modules with GCOV boilerplate.
> 
> Having the gcov stuff in-tree means that you can test the coverage of
> new code as you write it, so you could theoretically always have 100%
> coverage of the code which is committed.

We've had that code in cairo for years.  But getting coverage is so slow that
I doubt people use it regularly.


> Similarly, build.gnome.org only tests the versions of modules in the
> current jhbuild moduleset, not the latest git versions.
> 
> It's not much boilerplate code anyway, so I thought it was useful for
> libgdata. To each their own. :-)

Certainly disagree with the "not much boilerplate code anyway".  Looks like a
100 lines of copy/pasted code to me.  That's where all the cruft comes from...

behdad

> Philip
> 
>> behdad