[Python-Dev] Code coverage reporting.
Nick Coghlan
ncoghlan at gmail.com
Mon Jun 19 06:21:04 CEST 2006
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Mon Jun 19 06:21:04 CEST 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Code coverage reporting.
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Code coverage reporting.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
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. There's something odd going on with __future__.py, though. The module level code all shows up as not executed, but the bodies of the two _Feature methods both show up as being run. I'm curious as to how a function body can be executed without executing the function definition first :) As far as making the comments/docstrings less obvious goes, grey is usually a good option for that. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Code coverage reporting.
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Code coverage reporting.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list