This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Why don't use "Code Coverage" in GCC?
- From: "J.C. Pizarro" <jcpiza at gmail dot com>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Mark Mitchell" <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 01:43:48 +0100
- Subject: Why don't use "Code Coverage" in GCC?
Hello.
I'd read "GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2007-11-27)" from
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-11/msg00753.html
I suppose that there is not time to eliminate many bugs from
open regressions & others.
Could not we to use "Code coverage" of the GCC snapshot
during its bootstrapping or testsuite time?
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_coverage
It's very useful to analyze, line by line, or frame by frame,
the traces of the GCC's sources.
So, we can investigate "what lines are executed?"
and "what lines aren't executed?", "how many times are executed"?,
etc.
Thanks to "Code Coverage", with the traces, we can to detect
the anomalies of the new algorithms or existent modified algorithms.
It's a little different to profiling (almost profiling functions only).
"No Code Coverage" means "No important help from Code Coverage",
so "Code Coverage" is our future help to follow.
J.C.Pizarro