[Development] Code Coverage Statistics for QtBase

[Sébastien Fricker]

The script and the code behind which produce the coverage analysis is 
the same.
In both cases, a 'make check' is performed and then the data are collected.

Is it possible that the default build parameter get changed between 
Qt5.4 and dev?
For example XCB support get detected automatically and the code get enabled?

On 19/02/2015 16:55, Agocs Laszlo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Most of the platformsupport and platform plugin code was there in 5.4 
> too. Perhaps they were filtered out in the previous reports?
>
> Best regards,
> Laszlo
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* 
> development-bounces+laszlo.agocs=theqtcompany.com at qt-project.org 
> <development-bounces+laszlo.agocs=theqtcompany.com at qt-project.org> on 
> behalf of Paeglis Gatis <Gatis.Paeglis at theqtcompany.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 19, 2015 4:45 PM
> *To:* Sébastien Fricker; development
> *Subject:* Re: [Development] Code Coverage Statistics for QtBase
>
> Many of those files are from 3rdparty code, the ones I recognize are 
> from /qtbase/src/3rdparty/xkbcommon, those I think can
>
> be ignored when thinking from code coverage point of view.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* 
> development-bounces+gatis.paeglis=theqtcompany.com at qt-project.org 
> <development-bounces+gatis.paeglis=theqtcompany.com at qt-project.org> on 
> behalf of Sébastien Fricker <fricker at froglogic.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 19, 2015 3:51 PM
> *To:* development
> *Subject:* [Development] Code Coverage Statistics for QtBase
> Hi,
> According http://download.froglogic.com/public/qt5-squishcoco-report/ 
> there is a big decrease of the code coverage between Qt5/dev and Qt5.4.
> The code coverage from QtBase is decreasing from 56% to 42%.
>
> The first reason of that, is that approximately 100 new files get 
> added into the project and the code coverage of this set is near to 
> zero (see the HTML attachment and the table below).
> This new uncovered files are responsible of a lost of the code 
> coverage of 3% approximately.
> Question: are these files not tested through an unit test? If they are 
> tested, I need to look why they are not taken in account by the code 
> coverage analysis.
>
>
> The main difference are caused by the code coverage of the unit tests 
> itself.
> The number of unit tests did not decrease, but the code coverage of 
> the tests with the status Unknown decrease from 13% (from 43% to 30%) 
> and this explain the rest of the code coverage lost.
> These tests are in fact the code coverage of the code which is running 
> before and after a unit test (setup the GUI, common initializations 
> executed before main(), exit code, ...).
> Question: are they changes between Qt5.4 and Qt5/dev in QTestLib (in 
> the unit tests or in QtBase) which could explain this?
>
> Regards,
> Sébastien
>
> List of new files:
> Source 	Coverage (1 means 100%)
> action.c 	0
> ast-build.c 	0
> atom.c 	0
> compat.c 	0
> context-priv.c 	0
> context.c 	0
> expr.c 	0
> include.c 	0
> keycodes.c 	0
> keymap-dump.c 	0
> keymap-priv.c 	0
> keymap.c 	0
> keysym-utf.c 	0
> keysym.c 	0
> keywords.c 	0
> parser.c 	0
> parser.y 	0
> qbasicfontdatabase.cpp 	0
> qdbusmenuadaptor.cpp 	0
> qdbusmenuconnection.cpp 	0
> qdbusmenutypes.cpp 	0
> qdbusplatformmenu.cpp 	0
> qdbustrayicon.cpp 	0
> qdbustraytypes.cpp 	0
> qdevicediscovery_udev.cpp 	0
> qeglconvenience.cpp 	0
> qeglfscontext.cpp 	0
> qeglfsdeviceintegration.cpp 	0
> qeglfshooks.cpp 	0
> qeglfsintegration.cpp 	0
> qeglfsoffscreenwindow.cpp 	0
> qeglfsscreen.cpp 	0
> qeglfswindow.cpp 	0
> qeglpbuffer.cpp 	0
> qeglplatformcontext.cpp 	0
> qeglplatformcursor.cpp 	0
> qeglplatformintegration.cpp 	0
> qeglplatformscreen.cpp 	0
> qeglplatformwindow.cpp 	0
> qevdevkeyboardhandler.cpp 	0
> qevdevkeyboardmanager.cpp 	0
> qevdevmousehandler.cpp 	0
> qevdevmousemanager.cpp 	0
> qevdevtablet.cpp 	0
> qevdevtouch.cpp 	0
> qeventdispatcher_glib.cpp 	0
> qfbbackingstore.cpp 	0
> qfbcursor.cpp 	0
> qfbscreen.cpp 	0
> qfbvthandler.cpp 	0
> qfbwindow.cpp 	0
> qfontconfigdatabase.cpp 	0
> qfontengine_ft.cpp 	0
> qfontenginemultifontconfig.cpp 	0
> qgenericunixeventdispatcher.cpp 	0
> qgenericunixservices.cpp 	0
> qgenericunixthemes.cpp 	0
> qglxconvenience.cpp 	0
> qinputdevicemanager.cpp 	0
> qopenglcompositor.cpp 	0
> qopenglcompositorbackingstore.cpp 	0
> qopenglfunctions_4_4_compatibility.cpp 	0
> qopenglfunctions_4_4_core.cpp 	0
> qopenglfunctions_4_5_compatibility.cpp 	0
> qopenglfunctions_4_5_core.cpp 	0
> qplatformgraphicsbuffer.cpp 	0
> qplatformgraphicsbufferhelper.cpp 	0
> qsslellipticcurve.cpp 	0
> qsslpresharedkeyauthenticator.cpp 	0
> qstatusnotifieritemadaptor.cpp 	0
> qunixeventdispatcher.cpp 	0
> qxcbbackingstore.cpp 	0
> qxcbclipboard.cpp 	0
> qxcbconnection.cpp 	0
> qxcbconnection_xi2.cpp 	0
> qxcbcursor.cpp 	0
> qxcbdrag.cpp 	0
> qxcbglintegration.cpp 	0
> qxcbglintegrationfactory.cpp 	0
> qxcbimage.cpp 	0
> qxcbintegration.cpp 	0
> qxcbkeyboard.cpp 	0
> qxcbmime.cpp 	0
> qxcbnativeinterface.cpp 	0
> qxcbnativeinterfacehandler.cpp 	0
> qxcbscreen.cpp 	0
> qxcbsessionmanager.cpp 	0
> qxcbsystemtraytracker.cpp 	0
> qxcbwindow.cpp 	0
> qxcbwmsupport.cpp 	0
> qxcbxsettings.cpp 	0
> qxdgnotificationproxy.cpp 	0
> qxlibeglintegration.cpp 	0
> rules.c 	0
> scanner.c 	0
> state.c 	0
> symbols.c 	0
> text.c 	0
> types.c 	0
> utf8.c 	0
> utils.c 	0
> vmod.c 	0
> xkb-compat.c 	0
> xkb-keymap.c 	0
> xkbcomp.c 	0
> forkfd.c 	0,2841726619
> qsharedmemory_systemv.cpp 	0,5789473684
> qsystemsemaphore_systemv.cpp 	0,78125
> qsslellipticcurve_openssl.cpp 	1
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20150219/2bdde160/attachment.html>