This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Why don't use "Code Coverage" in GCC?
- From: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
- To: "J.C. Pizarro" <jcpiza at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:55:09 -0800
- Subject: Re: Why don't use "Code Coverage" in GCC?
- References: <998d0e4a0711271643g17a3bf2cu57e878a7a70ca684@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 01:43:48AM +0100, J.C. Pizarro wrote:
> 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?
Certainly. Would you like to volunteer?
> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_coverage
Everyone here knows what code coverage is. If you want to experiment with
gcov, see what our coverage rate is, or try to produce more tests to cover
more source lines, feel free.
You have a habit of saying "GCC should do X, GCC should do Y."
But things happen because people do the work, not because people
suggest that others do work.