From: Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
Date: 2004-03-22T07:45:26+09:00
Subject: Re: [ann] coverage 0.1

Simon Strandgaard wrote:

>Ruby - Coverage
>
>  
>
Just wanted to note that you have some users of this...

The students in my "Requirements Engineering and Verification and 
Validation" course have done statement coverage analysis while testing. 
They used a script based on a previous version of yours.

BTW, there is a rather delicate issue you might want to address: which 
rb files not to include in the analysis. My students used this when 
running their tests to see how well the tests covered the code. They 
found that all required files are included though, even std rb files 
like the ones in the lib needed for unit testing etc. Default might be 
to exclude these files.

Also they mentioned that the html files should be saved to a dir local 
to where the script is run and not in the absolute path of the 
corresponding rb file.

Maybe you have already fixed these issues...

BTW, I hacked up something similar to nounit.sf.net for them to use in 
their project but never had the time to finish it. Maybe we should merge 
our efforts into some kind of test evaluation package?

/Robert