Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

implement a Makefile target to measure code coverage of the testsuite #7049

Open
vicuna opened this issue Nov 19, 2015 · 10 comments
Open

implement a Makefile target to measure code coverage of the testsuite #7049

vicuna opened this issue Nov 19, 2015 · 10 comments
Assignees

Comments

@vicuna
Copy link

vicuna commented Nov 19, 2015

Original bug ID: 7049
Reporter: @gasche
Assigned to: @chambart
Status: assigned (set by @gasche on 2015-11-19T16:25:40Z)
Resolution: open
Priority: low
Severity: feature
Target version: later
Category: configure and build/install

Bug description

Pierre proposes to implement a new Makefile target to compute code coverage inside the compiler internals (based on xclerc's bisect, if I understand correctly).

@github-actions
Copy link

This issue has been open one year with no activity. Consequently, it is being marked with the "stale" label. What this means is that the issue will be automatically closed in 30 days unless more comments are added or the "stale" label is removed. Comments that provide new information on the issue are especially welcome: is it still reproducible? did it appear in other contexts? how critical is it? etc.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label May 11, 2020
@gasche
Copy link
Member

gasche commented May 18, 2020

Still relevant! @Octachron and @shindere worked on this last summer with an intern (Lereena), but it would require yet more work before something can be upstreamed, because it is tricky to have a maintainable approach -- it's easy to hack the build system to assume (ppx_)bisect is available and do something useful, but it is hard to have a robust solution that allows self-contained builds and also coverage measurement.

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the Stale label Jun 15, 2020
@damiendoligez
Copy link
Member

You could also use ocamlcp and ocamloptp to generate the coverage information. That would remove the bisect dependency.

@shindere
Copy link
Contributor

shindere commented Oct 19, 2020 via email

@Octachron
Copy link
Member

It was a choice between maintaining a back-end for generating good coverage reports from ocaml{c,opt}p or maintaining patchs to ppx_bisect front-end.

@shindere
Copy link
Contributor

shindere commented Oct 19, 2020 via email

@github-actions
Copy link

This issue has been open one year with no activity. Consequently, it is being marked with the "stale" label. What this means is that the issue will be automatically closed in 30 days unless more comments are added or the "stale" label is removed. Comments that provide new information on the issue are especially welcome: is it still reproducible? did it appear in other contexts? how critical is it? etc.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Oct 22, 2021
@shindere shindere assigned shindere and unassigned chambart Oct 22, 2021
@shindere
Copy link
Contributor

shindere commented Oct 22, 2021 via email

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the Stale label Oct 25, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link

This issue has been open one year with no activity. Consequently, it is being marked with the "stale" label. What this means is that the issue will be automatically closed in 30 days unless more comments are added or the "stale" label is removed. Comments that provide new information on the issue are especially welcome: is it still reproducible? did it appear in other contexts? how critical is it? etc.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Oct 28, 2022
@shindere
Copy link
Contributor

shindere commented Oct 28, 2022 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants