Use Advanced Search to search the entire archive.
[jsr363-experts] Re: Code Coverage
- From: Werner Keil <
>
- To: "
" <
>
- Subject: [jsr363-experts] Re: Code Coverage
- Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 18:21:25 +0200
Sorry a character was cut off,
https://coveralls.io/github/unitsofmeasurement/unit-ri
<
https://coveralls.io/github/unitsofmeasurement/unit-r> is the RI coveralls
URL, also see the project page of course.
Regards,
Werner
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Werner Keil
<
>
wrote:
>
Dear Experts,
>
>
Aside from questions about details of Bootstrap and related service
>
providers (which may also affect code coverage of the API) we have to
>
improve code coverage: https://java.net/jira/browse/UNITSOFMEASUREMENT-180
>
>
At the moment the API is around 65%
>
https://coveralls.io/github/unitsofmeasurement/unit-api.
>
Could be higher, it was around 70 before some new exception handling and
>
sorting in Bootstrap was introduced, that's extremely hard to test in the
>
test bed of unit-api. Please give it a try, at least once the API has been
>
stabilized. Again, turning e.g. ServiceProvider from an interface to a
>
class would affect code coverage of the API projects since JaCoCo only
>
deals with classes (AFAIK also abstract classes) Merging some aspects of
>
the API may affect code coverage either way, too.
>
Right now the POM requires it to be somewhat over 60% at the very least.
>
>
RI looks worse: https://coveralls.io/github/unitsofmeasurement/unit-r
>
~35% as LJC mentioned earlier, it is currently 37%. Measuring concrete or
>
abstract classes in the RI should be not hard, but we need more tests.
>
Please contribute where you can so we get closer to 73% than 37 ;-)
>
>
Thanks and Happy Remaining Easter,
>
>
Werner
>
>