Cobertura

Hi All,

  I come up with a scenario which I need to avoid branch coverage for a
method of a class that is called by many other classes. Is there any
possibilty to achive this in Cobertura?

Thanks,
Vanitha. S

=20

I'm not totally sure what you are asking.  If you are wanting to exclude
a method from the coverage report, then no, there is no way of doing
that.  You can only exclude classes.

=20

There is an option that seems close to what you are asking.  That is the
ability to skip over lines that have a certain method call:

=20

<ignore regex=3D"org.apache.log4j.*" />

=20

However, I don't believe this method works for branch coverage, but you
could try.

=20

John

=20

From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
[mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
Vanitha Subbiah
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 9:32 AM
To: Cobertura-devel@...
Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Is there any possiblity to avoid branch
coveragefor a method in a particular which is called by other classes?

=20

Hi All,

=20

  I come up with a scenario which I need to avoid branch coverage for a
method of a class that is called by many other classes. Is there any
possibilty to achive this in Cobertura?

Thanks,
Vanitha. S=20

I had similar problem before. When it is only about
30% coverage, but it gives 100% in the report. 

After many many times try, I noticed what caused that
issue in my case, ( but I still do not know why this
happened). 
When I was using ANT 1.6.5, it gives 30% in the
report, and when it is Ant 1.7, it gives me 100%. 

All my test cases are running on Linux Box, jdk 1.6. 



hope this may give you some clue. 


Chun

--- Adam Brod <abrod@...> wrote:

> Hi-
> 
> I am trying to create a very simple app to show the
> benefits of using Cobertura to my team.  However, I
> am getting bad data in my report.  I have
> UserCredentials and UserCredentialsTest.  The Test
> only calls to one of the four methods, so I should
> have coverage around 25%.  In fact, one time when I
> generated the report it did show the correct
> coverage.  However, now when I run the report it
> says I have 100% coverage, but when I view the
> source it shows green lines for the methods that
> were called and nothing for the methods that weren't
> tested.  Below is a screenshot of the report for the
> single class.  Does anybody have any ideas for what
> is wrong?  Below is the contents of the build script
> which invokes cobertura.
> 
> Thanks for your help!
> -Adam
> 
> [X]
> 
> <project name="coverage" basedir=".">
> 
>         <!-- Test coverage with cobertura -->
>         <target name="with-coverage"
> description="build with Cobertura test coverage
> enabled">
> 
>                 <property name="cobertura.dir"
> value="/multi/tools/cobertura"/>
> 
>                 <path id="cobertura.classpath">
>                         <fileset
> dir="${cobertura.dir}/lib">
>                                 <include
> name="*.jar" />
>                         </fileset>
>                 </path>
> 
>                 <!-- Cobertura code coverage tool
> -->
>                 <taskdef
> classpathref="cobertura.classpath"
> resource="tasks.properties" />
> 
>                 <property name="coverage.enabled"
> value="true"/>
>                 <property name="coverage.dir"
> value="coverage"/>
> 
> 
>                 <!-- on some environments we may
> want to put the report elsewhere-->
>                 <property name="coverage.report.dir"
> value="${coverage.dir}/coverage-report"/>
> 
> 
>                 <mkdir dir="${coverage.dir}"/>
>                 <mkdir
> dir="${coverage.report.dir}"/>
>                 <!-- the classes will be
> instrumented in place -->
>                 <property name="instrumented.dir"
> value="classes"/>
> 
>         </target>
> 
>         <!-- Instrument the classes for code
> coverage -->
>         <target name="instrument-coverage"
> if="coverage.enabled">
>                 <delete file="cobertura.ser"/>
>                 <cobertura-instrument
> todir="${instrumented.dir}" >
>                         <fileset dir="classes"
> excludes="**/*Test.class">
>                                 <include
> name="com/brightcove/**/*.class" />
>                         </fileset>
>                 </cobertura-instrument>
>         </target>
> 
>         <target name="compile">
> 
>                 <!-- Call-out to the compiler task.
> fork is set to true cos bonecrusher will run out of
> memory -->
>                 <javac srcdir="src"
>                fork="true"
>            destdir="classes"
>            source="1.5"
>            memorymaximumsize="512m">
>                 </javac>
> 
>                 <!-- Instrument the classes if
> needed for coverage report -->
>                 <runtarget
> target="instrument-coverage" />
>         </target>
> 
>         <target name="coverage-report"
> depends="with-coverage">
>                 <delete
> dir="${coverage.report.dir}">
>                 </delete>
>                 <cobertura-report format="html"
> destdir="${coverage.report.dir}" srcdir="src" />
>         </target>
> 
> </project>
> 
> Brightcove, Inc.
> http://www.brightcove.com<http://www.brightcove.com>
> One Cambridge Center, 12th Floor, Cambridge, MA
> 02142
> P: 617.500.4947  F: 617.395.8352
> 
> 
> 
> >
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio
> 2005.
>
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/>
_______________________________________________
> Cobertura-devel mailing list
> Cobertura-devel@...
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/

If you are not using Ant 1.7, then it most likely means the jvm that
runs the tests is not using the cobertura.ser file that is created by
the <cobertura-instrument>.  I expect you have two cobertura.ser files
on your hard drive.  One is created by cobertura-instrument.  The other
is created by the jvm that runs the tests (in the working directory).
Is this happening?

John

-----Original Message-----
From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
[mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of chun
ji
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 7:11 PM
To: Adam Brod; cobertura-devel@...
Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Report shows 100% coverage but it should
be33%


I had similar problem before. When it is only about
30% coverage, but it gives 100% in the report.=20

After many many times try, I noticed what caused that
issue in my case, ( but I still do not know why this
happened).=20
When I was using ANT 1.6.5, it gives 30% in the
report, and when it is Ant 1.7, it gives me 100%.=20

All my test cases are running on Linux Box, jdk 1.6.=20



hope this may give you some clue.=20


Chun

--- Adam Brod <abrod@...> wrote:

> Hi-
>=20
> I am trying to create a very simple app to show the
> benefits of using Cobertura to my team.  However, I
> am getting bad data in my report.  I have
> UserCredentials and UserCredentialsTest.  The Test
> only calls to one of the four methods, so I should
> have coverage around 25%.  In fact, one time when I
> generated the report it did show the correct
> coverage.  However, now when I run the report it
> says I have 100% coverage, but when I view the
> source it shows green lines for the methods that
> were called and nothing for the methods that weren't
> tested.  Below is a screenshot of the report for the
> single class.  Does anybody have any ideas for what
> is wrong?  Below is the contents of the build script
> which invokes cobertura.
>=20
> Thanks for your help!
> -Adam
>=20
> [X]
>=20
> <project name=3D"coverage" basedir=3D".">
>=20
>         <!-- Test coverage with cobertura -->
>         <target name=3D"with-coverage"
> description=3D"build with Cobertura test coverage
> enabled">
>=20
>                 <property name=3D"cobertura.dir"
> value=3D"/multi/tools/cobertura"/>
>=20
>                 <path id=3D"cobertura.classpath">
>                         <fileset
> dir=3D"${cobertura.dir}/lib">
>                                 <include
> name=3D"*.jar" />
>                         </fileset>
>                 </path>
>=20
>                 <!-- Cobertura code coverage tool
> -->
>                 <taskdef
> classpathref=3D"cobertura.classpath"
> resource=3D"tasks.properties" />
>=20
>                 <property name=3D"coverage.enabled"
> value=3D"true"/>
>                 <property name=3D"coverage.dir"
> value=3D"coverage"/>
>=20
>=20
>                 <!-- on some environments we may
> want to put the report elsewhere-->
>                 <property name=3D"coverage.report.dir"
> value=3D"${coverage.dir}/coverage-report"/>
>=20
>=20
>                 <mkdir dir=3D"${coverage.dir}"/>
>                 <mkdir
> dir=3D"${coverage.report.dir}"/>
>                 <!-- the classes will be
> instrumented in place -->
>                 <property name=3D"instrumented.dir"
> value=3D"classes"/>
>=20
>         </target>
>=20
>         <!-- Instrument the classes for code
> coverage -->
>         <target name=3D"instrument-coverage"
> if=3D"coverage.enabled">
>                 <delete file=3D"cobertura.ser"/>
>                 <cobertura-instrument
> todir=3D"${instrumented.dir}" >
>                         <fileset dir=3D"classes"
> excludes=3D"**/*Test.class">
>                                 <include
> name=3D"com/brightcove/**/*.class" />
>                         </fileset>
>                 </cobertura-instrument>
>         </target>
>=20
>         <target name=3D"compile">
>=20
>                 <!-- Call-out to the compiler task.
> fork is set to true cos bonecrusher will run out of
> memory -->
>                 <javac srcdir=3D"src"
>                fork=3D"true"
>            destdir=3D"classes"
>            source=3D"1.5"
>            memorymaximumsize=3D"512m">
>                 </javac>
>=20
>                 <!-- Instrument the classes if
> needed for coverage report -->
>                 <runtarget
> target=3D"instrument-coverage" />
>         </target>
>=20
>         <target name=3D"coverage-report"
> depends=3D"with-coverage">
>                 <delete
> dir=3D"${coverage.report.dir}">
>                 </delete>
>                 <cobertura-report format=3D"html"
> destdir=3D"${coverage.report.dir}" srcdir=3D"src" />
>         </target>
>=20
> </project>
>=20
> Brightcove, Inc.
> http://www.brightcove.com<http://www.brightcove.com>
> One Cambridge Center, 12th Floor, Cambridge, MA
> 02142
> P: 617.500.4947  F: 617.395.8352
>=20
>=20
>=20
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio
> 2005.
>
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/>
_______________________________________________
> Cobertura-devel mailing list
> Cobertura-devel@...
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
>=20



      =20
________________________________________________________________________
____________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Cobertura-devel mailing list
Cobertura-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel

I think I found the solution in the FAQ.  I swear I had read it before...

I think I was deleting my coverage file each time I generated a report, but=
 I was not deleting my instrumented classes.  Now I delete them at the same=
 time and everything works.

-Adam

-----Original Message-----
From: cobertura-devel-bounces@... [mailto:cobertura-devel=
-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Adam Brod
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 6:13 PM
To: cobertura-devel@...
Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Report shows 100% coverage but it should be 33%

Hi-

I am trying to create a very simple app to show the benefits of using Cober=
tura to my team.  However, I am getting bad data in my report.  I have User=
Credentials and UserCredentialsTest.  The Test only calls to one of the fou=
r methods, so I should have coverage around 25%.  In fact, one time when I =
generated the report it did show the correct coverage.  However, now when I=
 run the report it says I have 100% coverage, but when I view the source it=
 shows green lines for the methods that were called and nothing for the met=
hods that weren't tested.  Below is a screenshot of the report for the sing=
le class.  Does anybody have any ideas for what is wrong?  Below is the con=
tents of the build script which invokes cobertura.

Thanks for your help!
-Adam

 <rtfimage://>

<project name=3D"coverage" basedir=3D".">

        <!-- Test coverage with cobertura -->
        <target name=3D"with-coverage" description=3D"build with Cobertura =
test coverage enabled">

                <property name=3D"cobertura.dir" value=3D"/multi/tools/cobe=
rtura"/>

                <path id=3D"cobertura.classpath">
                        <fileset dir=3D"${cobertura.dir}/lib">
                                <include name=3D"*.jar" />
                        </fileset>
                </path>

                <!-- Cobertura code coverage tool -->
                <taskdef classpathref=3D"cobertura.classpath" resource=3D"t=
asks.properties" />

                <property name=3D"coverage.enabled" value=3D"true"/>
                <property name=3D"coverage.dir" value=3D"coverage"/>


                <!-- on some environments we may want to put the report els=
ewhere-->
                <property name=3D"coverage.report.dir" value=3D"${coverage.=
dir}/coverage-report"/>


                <mkdir dir=3D"${coverage.dir}"/>
                <mkdir dir=3D"${coverage.report.dir}"/>
                <!-- the classes will be instrumented in place -->
                <property name=3D"instrumented.dir" value=3D"classes"/>

        </target>

        <!-- Instrument the classes for code coverage -->
        <target name=3D"instrument-coverage" if=3D"coverage.enabled">
                <delete file=3D"cobertura.ser"/>
                <cobertura-instrument todir=3D"${instrumented.dir}" >
                        <fileset dir=3D"classes" excludes=3D"**/*Test.class=
">
                                <include name=3D"com/brightcove/**/*.class"=
 />
                        </fileset>
                </cobertura-instrument>
        </target>

        <target name=3D"compile">

                <!-- Call-out to the compiler task. fork is set to true cos=
 bonecrusher will run out of memory -->
                <javac srcdir=3D"src"
               fork=3D"true"
            destdir=3D"classes"
           source=3D"1.5"
            memorymaximumsize=3D"512m">
                </javac>

                <!-- Instrument the classes if needed for coverage report -=
->
                <runtarget target=3D"instrument-coverage" />
        </target>

        <target name=3D"coverage-report" depends=3D"with-coverage">
                <delete dir=3D"${coverage.report.dir}">
                </delete>
                <cobertura-report format=3D"html" destdir=3D"${coverage.rep=
ort.dir}" srcdir=3D"src" />
        </target>

</project>

Brightcove, Inc. http://www.brightcove.com <http://www.brightcove.com>
One Cambridge Center, 12th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02142
P: 617.500.4947  F: 617.395.8352

Hello,
        i am trying to run cobertura in my mvn2 application...
cobertura:instrumet work sfine, but when i run cobertura:check i got hte 
following exception (obtained by using mvn -X)

[INFO] Instrumentation was successful.
[DEBUG] Configuring mojo 
'org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-resources-plugin:2.3-SN
APSHOT:testResources' -->
[DEBUG]   (f) filters = []
[DEBUG]   (f) outputDirectory = C:\KPL\target\test-classes
[DEBUG]   (f) project = org.apache.maven.project.MavenProject@...
[DEBUG]   (f) resources = [org.apache.maven.model.Resource@...]
[DEBUG] -- end configuration --
[INFO] [resources:testResources]
[INFO] Using default encoding to copy filtered resources.
[INFO] Copying 4 resources
[DEBUG] KPL:KPL:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT (selected for null)
[DEBUG]   fit:fitWSPricingClient:jar:1.0:system (selected for system)
[DEBUG]   axis:axis:jar:1.4:compile (selected for compile)
[DEBUG]     axis:axis-jaxrpc:jar:1.4:compile (selected for compile)
[DEBUG]     axis:axis-saaj:jar:1.4:compile (selected for compile)
[DEBUG]     axis:axis-wsdl4j:jar:1.5.1:runtime (selected for runtime)
[DEBUG]     commons-logging:commons-logging:jar:1.0.4:runtime (selected 
for runt
ime)
[DEBUG]     commons-discovery:commons-discovery:jar:0.2:runtime (selected 
for ru
ntime)
[DEBUG]       commons-logging:commons-logging:jar:1.0.3:runtime (removed - 
neare
r found: 1.0.4)
[DEBUG]   junit:junit:jar:3.8.1:compile (selected for compile)
[DEBUG]   jasperreports:jasperreports:jar:1.3.3:compile (selected for 
compile)
[DEBUG]     commons-beanutils:commons-beanutils:jar:1.7.0:compile 
(selected for
compile)
[DEBUG]       commons-logging:commons-logging:jar:1.0.4:runtime (setting 
scope t
o: compile)
[DEBUG]       commons-logging:commons-logging:jar:1.0.4:compile (selected 
for co
mpile)
[DEBUG]     commons-collections:commons-collections:jar:20040616:compile 
(settin
g version to: 20040616 from range: [2.1,))
[DEBUG]     commons-collections:commons-collections:jar:20040616:compile 
(select
ed for compile)
[DEBUG]     commons-digester:commons-digester:jar:1.7:compile (setting 
version t
o: 1.7 from range: [1.7,))
[DEBUG]     commons-digester:commons-digester:jar:1.7:compile (selected 
for comp
ile)
[DEBUG]       commons-beanutils:commons-beanutils:jar:1.6:compile (removed 
- nea
rer found: 1.7.0)
[DEBUG]       commons-logging:commons-logging:jar:1.0:compile (removed - 
nearer
found: 1.0.4)
[DEBUG]       commons-collections:commons-collections:jar:2.1:compile 
(range res
tricted from: 2.1 and: [2.1,) to: 2.1 )
[DEBUG]       xml-apis:xml-apis:jar:1.0.b2:compile (selected for compile)
[DEBUG]     commons-logging:commons-logging:jar:1.1:compile (setting 
version to:
 1.1 from range: [1.0,))
[DEBUG]     commons-logging:commons-logging:jar:1.1:compile (range 
restricted fr
om: [1.0,) and: 1.0.4 to: 1.0.4 )
[INFO] 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ERROR] FATAL ERROR
[INFO] 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] null
[INFO] 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[DEBUG] Trace
java.lang.NullPointerException
        at 
org.apache.maven.artifact.resolver.DefaultArtifactCollector.recurse(D
efaultArtifactCollector.java:164)
        at 
org.apache.maven.artifact.resolver.DefaultArtifactCollector.recurse(D
efaultArtifactCollector.java:334)
        at 
org.apache.maven.artifact.resolver.DefaultArtifactCollector.recurse(D
efaultArtifactCollector.java:334)
        at 
org.apache.maven.artifact.resolver.DefaultArtifactCollector.collect(D
efaultArtifactCollector.java:75)
        at 
org.apache.maven.artifact.resolver.DefaultArtifactResolver.resolveTra
nsitively(DefaultArtifactResolver.java:284)
        at 
org.apache.maven.artifact.resolver.DefaultArtifactResolver.resolveTra
nsitively(DefaultArtifactResolver.java:272)
        at 
org.apache.maven.plugin.DefaultPluginManager.resolveTransitiveDepende
ncies(DefaultPluginManager.java:1238)
        at 
org.apache.maven.plugin.DefaultPluginManager.executeMojo(DefaultPlugi
nManager.java:397)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.executeGoals(Defa
ultLifecycleExecutor.java:539)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.executeGoalWithLi
fecycle(DefaultLifecycleExecutor.java:480)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.forkProjectLifecy
cle(DefaultLifecycleExecutor.java:896)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.forkLifecycle(Def
aultLifecycleExecutor.java:739)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.executeGoals(Defa
ultLifecycleExecutor.java:510)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.executeStandalone
Goal(DefaultLifecycleExecutor.java:493)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.executeGoal(Defau
ltLifecycleExecutor.java:463)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.executeGoalAndHan
dleFailures(DefaultLifecycleExecutor.java:311)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.executeTaskSegmen
ts(DefaultLifecycleExecutor.java:278)
        at 
org.apache.maven.lifecycle.DefaultLifecycleExecutor.execute(DefaultLi
fecycleExecutor.java:143)
        at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute(DefaultMaven.java:334)
        at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute(DefaultMaven.java:125)
        at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main(MavenCli.java:272)
        at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
        at 
sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.
java:39)
        at 
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAcces
sorImpl.java:25)
        at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585)
        at 
org.codehaus.classworlds.Launcher.launchEnhanced(Launcher.java:315)
        at org.codehaus.classworlds.Launcher.launch(Launcher.java:255)
        at 
org.codehaus.classworlds.Launcher.mainWithExitCode(Launcher.java:430)

        at org.codehaus.classworlds.Launcher.main(Launcher.java:375)
[INFO] 
------------------------------------------------------------------------


could anyone tell me what am i doign wrong?
below is my pom.xm (only relevant part)

<reporting>
        <plugins>
                <plugin>
                        <groupId>org.codehaus.mojo</groupId>
                        <artifactId>cobertura-maven-plugin</artifactId>
                        <configuration>
                                <check>
                                        <totalLineRate>50</totalLineRate>
 <totalBranchRate>50</totalBranchRate>
                                </check>
                        </configuration>
 
 
                </plugin>
 
        </plugins>
      </reporting>

thanks in advance and regards
        marco



This message and any attachments (the "message") is 
intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. 
If you receive this message in error, please delete it and
immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with
its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole
or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet
can not guarantee the integrity of this message.
BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not
therefore be liable for the message if modified. 

**********************************************************************************************

BNP Paribas Private Bank London Branch is authorised
by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services
Authority for the conduct of its investment business in
the United Kingdom.

BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch is authorised 
by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services 
Authority for the conduct of its investment business in 
the United Kingdom.
  
BNP Paribas Fund Services UK Limited is authorised and 
regulated by the Financial Services Authority
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John,

>>It looks like you just need to make sure that at least one attribute is
>>set to non-zero. =20
Aren't you consider it as the bug? Shouldn't it check if variable is set at=
 all and use given value and not make wrong assumption?
What if I explicitly want to start with 0(zero) for all of them and increas=
e the numbers wile I progress with the project?

>>Also, you could choose one default to be a very low
>> number such as 0.0001.
The documentation says that the number "should be an integer value between =
0 and 100."
However I tried use your suggestion and not-surprisingly  'cobertura-check'=
  failed  with  java.lang.NumberFormatException, it does require an integer=
.

Aleksey


> Subject: RE: [Cobertura-devel] cobertura-check task wrongly defaults to 5=
0%
> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:34:34 -0400
> From: JohnW.Lewis@...
> To: alekseyig@...; cobertura-devel@...
>=20
>=20
> The code that is giving you trouble is here:
>=20
> 		// If they didn't specify any thresholds, then use some
> defaults
> 		if ((branchCoverageRate =3D=3D 0) && (lineCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> 				&& (packageLineCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> 				&& (packageBranchCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> 				&& (totalLineCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> 				&& (totalBranchCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> 				&& (this.minimumCoverageRates.size() =3D=3D
> 0))
> 		{
> 			branchCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> 			lineCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> 			packageBranchCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> 			packageLineCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> 			totalBranchCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> 			totalLineCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> 		}
>=20
> It looks like you just need to make sure that at least one attribute is
> set to non-zero.  Also, you could choose one default to be a very low
> number such as 0.0001.
>=20
> John
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
> [mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Alex
> Zhukov
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 3:40 PM
> To: cobertura-devel@...
> Subject: [Cobertura-devel] cobertura-check task wrongly defaults to 50%
>=20
>=20
> All, I already posted this question here, but did not get any response,
> it may slipped out of your attention.
>=20
> Can any one comment on it?
>=20
> We would like that all our builds would call "coverage-check"
> target with "*rate" parameters set to 0 (zero) and having each build
> overwrite any of these parameters depending on the requirements.  The
> only one problem with that is that apparently "coverage-check" task
> treats 0(zero) as unset value and uses 50% rate instead 0% rate and
> reports the error that coverage is less that 50%.
>=20
> Build.xml:
> <property name=3D"cobertura_branchrate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_linerate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_packagebranchrate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_packagelinerate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_totalbranchrate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_totallinerate" value=3D"0"/>
>=20
> <target name=3D"cobertura_coverage_checker">
> <cobertura-check failureproperty=3D"cobertura.coverage.failure"
>                  haltonfailure=3D"false"
>                  branchrate=3D"${cobertura_branchrate}"
>                  linerate=3D"${cobertura_linerate}"
>                  packagebranchrate=3D"${cobertura_packagebranchrate}"
>                  packagelinerate=3D"${cobertura_packagelinerate}"
>                  totalbranchrate=3D"${cobertura_totalbranchrate}"
>                  cotallinerate=3D"${cobertura_totallinerate}"/>
>=20
> The output:
> cobertura_coverage_checker:
> [cobertura-check] Cobertura 1.9 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See
> COPYRIGHT file [cobertura-check] Cobertura: Loaded information on 31
> classes.
> [cobertura-check]UserNamePasswordLoginCredential failed check. Branch
> coverage rate of 0.0% is  below 50.0%
> [cobertura-check]UserNamePasswordLoginCredential failed check. Line
> coverage rate of 0.0% is elow 50.0%
> [cobertura-check]LoginAuthenticationToken failed check. Branch coverage
> rate of 0.0% is below 0.0% [cobertura-check]LoginAuthenticationToken
> failed check. Line coverage rate of 0.0% is below 0.0%
>=20
>=20
> Are we missing something?
>=20
>=20
> Aleksey.
>=20
> _________________________________________________________________
> More photos; more messages; more whatever. Windows Live Hotmail - NOW
> with 5GB storage.=20
> http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=3Den-us&ocid=3DTXT_TAGHM_m=
igr
> ation_HM_mini_5G_0907
>=20
>=20

_________________________________________________________________
More photos; more messages; more whatever =96 Get MORE with Windows Live=99=
 Hotmail=AE. NOW with 5GB storage.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=3Den-us&ocid=3DTXT_TAGHM_mig=
ration_HM_mini_5G_0907=

=20

Let me try to explain better.  I am assuming that for all of your
projects, you will set at least one of the values to be non-zero.  If
that is the case, then you are ok because the default of 50% only comes
into play when all of the values are set to zero.

=20

If however, you have at least one project where you want to
intentionally pass in 0 for all values, then I am assuming you do not
want the check to fail in any case.  Sorry I did not know about the
integer requirement, but would a value of 1 work for you?  Is there any
practical difference between 0% and 1%?  I suppose there would be if you
are not instrumenting any classes or running any tests.  Is this your
case?

=20

I can't call this a bug because it is obvious that the original
developer intended there to be a check of 50% coverage if no percentages
were passed in.  It works as designed, and I have no idea who may be
using this functionality.  I assume the original developer thought it
would be helpful.  I can't really change it without alerting the users
and possibly bringing it up for a vote.

=20

There is another possiblity.  You could write your ant script to check
for all zeros and skip the check.   The <if> that the ant contrib
library provides may be helpful for this.

=20

I hope this helps,

=20

John

=20

From: Alex Zhukov [mailto:alekseyig@...
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 5:10 PM
To: John W. Lewis; cobertura-devel@...
Subject: RE: [Cobertura-devel] cobertura-check task wrongly defaults to
50%

=20

John,

>>It looks like you just need to make sure that at least one attribute
is
>>set to non-zero.=20
Aren't you consider it as the bug? Shouldn't it check if variable is set
at all and use given value and not make wrong assumption?
What if I explicitly want to start with 0(zero) for all of them and
increase the numbers wile I progress with the project?

>>Also, you could choose one default to be a very low
>> number such as 0.0001.
The documentation says that the number "should be an integer value
between 0 and 100."
However I tried use your suggestion and not-surprisingly
'cobertura-check'  failed  with  java.lang.NumberFormatException, it
does require an integer.

Aleksey


> Subject: RE: [Cobertura-devel] cobertura-check task wrongly defaults
to 50%
> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:34:34 -0400
> From: JohnW.Lewis@...
> To: alekseyig@...; cobertura-devel@...
>=20
>=20
> The code that is giving you trouble is here:
>=20
> // If they didn't specify any thresholds, then use some
> defaults
> if ((branchCoverageRate =3D=3D 0) && (lineCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> && (packageLineCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> && (packageBranchCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> && (totalLineCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> && (totalBranchCoverageRate =3D=3D 0)
> && (this.minimumCoverageRates.size() =3D=3D
> 0))
> {
> branchCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> lineCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> packageBranchCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> packageLineCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> totalBranchCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> totalLineCoverageRate =3D 0.5;
> }
>=20
> It looks like you just need to make sure that at least one attribute
is
> set to non-zero. Also, you could choose one default to be a very low
> number such as 0.0001.
>=20
> John
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
> [mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
Alex
> Zhukov
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 3:40 PM
> To: cobertura-devel@...
> Subject: [Cobertura-devel] cobertura-check task wrongly defaults to
50%
>=20
>=20
> All, I already posted this question here, but did not get any
response,
> it may slipped out of your attention.
>=20
> Can any one comment on it?
>=20
> We would like that all our builds would call "coverage-check"
> target with "*rate" parameters set to 0 (zero) and having each build
> overwrite any of these parameters depending on the requirements. The
> only one problem with that is that apparently "coverage-check" task
> treats 0(zero) as unset value and uses 50% rate instead 0% rate and
> reports the error that coverage is less that 50%.
>=20
> Build.xml:
> <property name=3D"cobertura_branchrate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_linerate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_packagebranchrate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_packagelinerate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_totalbranchrate" value=3D"0"/> <property
> name=3D"cobertura_totallinerate" value=3D"0"/>
>=20
> <target name=3D"cobertura_coverage_checker">
> <cobertura-check failureproperty=3D"cobertura.coverage.failure"
> haltonfailure=3D"false"
> branchrate=3D"${cobertura_branchrate}"
> linerate=3D"${cobertura_linerate}"
> packagebranchrate=3D"${cobertura_packagebranchrate}"
> packagelinerate=3D"${cobertura_packagelinerate}"
> totalbranchrate=3D"${cobertura_totalbranchrate}"
> cotallinerate=3D"${cobertura_totallinerate}"/>
>=20
> The output:
> cobertura_coverage_checker:
> [cobertura-check] Cobertura 1.9 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See
> COPYRIGHT file [cobertura-check] Cobertura: Loaded information on 31
> classes.
> [cobertura-check]UserNamePasswordLoginCredential failed check. Branch
> coverage rate of 0.0% is below 50.0%
> [cobertura-check]UserNamePasswordLoginCredential failed check. Line
> coverage rate of 0.0% is elow 50.0%
> [cobertura-check]LoginAuthenticationToken failed check. Branch
coverage
> rate of 0.0% is below 0.0% [cobertura-check]LoginAuthenticationToken
> failed check. Line coverage rate of 0.0% is below 0.0%
>=20
>=20
> Are we missing something?
>=20
>=20
> Aleksey.
>=20
> _________________________________________________________________
> More photos; more messages; more whatever. Windows Live Hotmail - NOW
> with 5GB storage.=20
>
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=3Den-us&ocid=3DTXT_TAGHM_m=
igr
> ation_HM_mini_5G_0907
>=20
>=20

________________________________

More photos; more messages; more whatever - Get MORE with Windows
Live(tm) Hotmail(r). NOW with 5GB storage. Get more!
<http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=3Den-us&ocid=3DTXT_TAGHM_=
mig
ration_HM_mini_5G_0907>=20

Hi Tarun,

you are 100% right.

Unfortunatelly there is no way how to distinquish using conditional byte 
code instructions without source code. At the moment cobertura is not 
using source code ...

Jirka

Tarun Modi napsal(a):
> Hi all,
> I have run ur tool on my class i.e.
> 
> public class IfOnly {
>  4            public boolean ifmethod(boolean b) {
>  5  1          boolean a = false;
>  6  1          if (b) {
>  7  1              a = a || b;
>  8            }
>  9  1          return a;
>  10        }
> 
> On line 6 it is showing Conditional Coverge 50%(1/2) and on line 7 it
> is showing Conditional Coverage 50%(2/4)[each condition 50%,50%] .
> what i know about branch coverage is that branch are like if ,switch
> ,for ,while like statements..
> But u have counted line 6 & line 7 in ur total(class) branch coverage
> i.e. 50%(3/6).
> what i have got reason behind that is in bytecode the or(||) of line 7
> is breakdown into "ifeq" and "ifne" ... same as "if" statement
> Is this is the reason that tool cant diffrentiate the "if" and
> "or(||)" statement..??
> Does ASM provide any class or feature that diffrences between the above two ..??
> Kindly reply to this mail and clarify my doubts...
> and if possible please explain it....
> 
> 
> Regards
> tarun
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Cobertura-devel mailing list
> Cobertura-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
>

You reasoning is good.  Cobertura uses the bytecode directly.  That
unfortunately means there are some lines that show conditions because
the compiler inserts them.

I'm not an ASM expert, but I doubt it provides a way of differentiating
between the two.  I would think the bytecode would have to store
information on what the source looked like.

John=20

-----Original Message-----
From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
[mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
Tarun Modi
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 5:34 AM
To: cobertura-devel@...
Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason

Hi all,
I have run ur tool on my class i.e.

public class IfOnly {
 4            public boolean ifmethod(boolean b) {
 5  1          boolean a =3D false;
 6  1          if (b) {
 7  1              a =3D a || b;
 8            }
 9  1          return a;
 10        }

On line 6 it is showing Conditional Coverge 50%(1/2) and on line 7 it is
showing Conditional Coverage 50%(2/4)[each condition 50%,50%] .
what i know about branch coverage is that branch are like if ,switch
,for ,while like statements..
But u have counted line 6 & line 7 in ur total(class) branch coverage
i.e. 50%(3/6).
what i have got reason behind that is in bytecode the or(||) of line 7
is breakdown into "ifeq" and "ifne" ... same as "if" statement Is this
is the reason that tool cant diffrentiate the "if" and "or(||)"
statement..??
Does ASM provide any class or feature that diffrences between the above
two ..??
Kindly reply to this mail and clarify my doubts...
and if possible please explain it....


Regards
tarun

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges.
Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Cobertura-devel mailing list
Cobertura-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel

Hi All,
Thanks john for replying ...
Isn't there any way in bytecode to diffrentiate the two...???
Source code is the only way ..??
Does BCEL or something else can help in this ....i know u are not an
expert in asm or bcel.....
but if u have an idea or something ...
Any clarification is greatly appreciable...
Thanks in advance...

Regards
tarun





On 9/11/07, John W. Lewis <JohnW.Lewis@...> wrote:
>
> You reasoning is good.  Cobertura uses the bytecode directly.  That
> unfortunately means there are some lines that show conditions because
> the compiler inserts them.
>
> I'm not an ASM expert, but I doubt it provides a way of differentiating
> between the two.  I would think the bytecode would have to store
> information on what the source looked like.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
> [mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
> Tarun Modi
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 5:34 AM
> To: cobertura-devel@...
> Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason
>
> Hi all,
> I have run ur tool on my class i.e.
>
> public class IfOnly {
>  4            public boolean ifmethod(boolean b) {
>  5  1          boolean a = false;
>  6  1          if (b) {
>  7  1              a = a || b;
>  8            }
>  9  1          return a;
>  10        }
>
> On line 6 it is showing Conditional Coverge 50%(1/2) and on line 7 it is
> showing Conditional Coverage 50%(2/4)[each condition 50%,50%] .
> what i know about branch coverage is that branch are like if ,switch
> ,for ,while like statements..
> But u have counted line 6 & line 7 in ur total(class) branch coverage
> i.e. 50%(3/6).
> what i have got reason behind that is in bytecode the or(||) of line 7
> is breakdown into "ifeq" and "ifne" ... same as "if" statement Is this
> is the reason that tool cant diffrentiate the "if" and "or(||)"
> statement..??
> Does ASM provide any class or feature that diffrences between the above
> two ..??
> Kindly reply to this mail and clarify my doubts...
> and if possible please explain it....
>
>
> Regards
> tarun
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges.
> Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Cobertura-devel mailing list
> Cobertura-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
>
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Hi tarun,

I have idea to check for specific sequence of instruction to ignore it =
as branch, it is usable for expressions like 

String.class

(also contains conditional jump) but not for others, therefore I'm more=
 thinking about using source code during instrumentation too. This also=
 conforms with the idea to support clover ignore comments and resolve m=
any other problems (eg. autogenerated code that is generated as code on=
 line 1 in source code etc).

Jirka

> ------------ P=F9vodn=ED zpr=E1va ------------
> Od: Tarun Modi <modi.tarun@...>
> P=F8edm=ECt: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason
> Datum: 11.9.2007 09:06:36
> ----------------------------------------
> Hi All,
> Thanks john for replying ...
> Isn't there any way in bytecode to diffrentiate the two...???
> Source code is the only way ..??
> Does BCEL or something else can help in this ....i know u are not an
> expert in asm or bcel.....
> but if u have an idea or something ...
> Any clarification is greatly appreciable...
> Thanks in advance...
> 
> Regards
> tarun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/11/07, John W. Lewis <JohnW.Lewis@...> wrote:
> >
> > You reasoning is good.  Cobertura uses the bytecode directly.  That=

> > unfortunately means there are some lines that show conditions becau=
se
> > the compiler inserts them.
> >
> > I'm not an ASM expert, but I doubt it provides a way of differentia=
ting
> > between the two.  I would think the bytecode would have to store
> > information on what the source looked like.
> >
> > John
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
> > [mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of=

> > Tarun Modi
> > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 5:34 AM
> > To: cobertura-devel@...
> > Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I have run ur tool on my class i.e.
> >
> > public class IfOnly {
> >  4            public boolean ifmethod(boolean b) {
> >  5  1          boolean a =3D false;
> >  6  1          if (b) {
> >  7  1              a =3D a || b;
> >  8            }
> >  9  1          return a;
> >  10        }
> >
> > On line 6 it is showing Conditional Coverge 50%(1/2) and on line 7 =
it is
> > showing Conditional Coverage 50%(2/4)[each condition 50%,50%] .
> > what i know about branch coverage is that branch are like if ,switc=
h
> > ,for ,while like statements..
> > But u have counted line 6 & line 7 in ur total(class) branch covera=
ge
> > i.e. 50%(3/6).
> > what i have got reason behind that is in bytecode the or(||) of lin=
e 7
> > is breakdown into "ifeq" and "ifne" ... same as "if" statement Is t=
his
> > is the reason that tool cant diffrentiate the "if" and "or(||)"
> > statement..??
> > Does ASM provide any class or feature that diffrences between the a=
bove
> > two ..??
> > Kindly reply to this mail and clarify my doubts...
> > and if possible please explain it....
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > tarun
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
> > -
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges.
> > Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cobertura-devel mailing list
> > Cobertura-devel@...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Cobertura-devel mailing list
> Cobertura-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
> 
> 
> 

Jiri Mares (mailto: Jiri.Mares@...)

Hi tarun,

again I don't think so that any byte code manipulation framework can he=
lp, the conditional jump is there and no metadata, the only way is to u=
se source code, but it isn't 100% solution. Maybe we are going to intro=
duce some source code comment, like clover, to ignore coverage (branch =
or line) at some code ...

Jirka

> ------------ P=F9vodn=ED zpr=E1va ------------
> Od: Tarun Modi <modi.tarun@...>
> P=F8edm=ECt: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason
> Datum: 11.9.2007 09:27:43
> ----------------------------------------
> Hi ,
> thanks for replying  Ji=F8=ED ...
> Is there any plan that cobertura uses source code..??
> what i know is that bytecode instrumentation is more powerful than sr=
c
> code instr....as cobertura uses bytecode...
> As in java5 java.lang.instrument API is also added for byecode instr.=
.
> does bytecode lacks this difference("if" and or"||" etc)...
> isn't there any other way out in bytecode...??
> does any other library (bcel,serp...) can help in this ..??
> Although i know cobertura doesnt uses other libr...but any reply
> regarding this will be gratefull...
> Any help regarging this context ???
> 
> Regards
> tarun
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/11/07, Ji=F8=ED Mare=B9 <Jiri.Mares@...> wrote:
> > Hi Tarun,
> >
> > you are 100% right.
> >
> > Unfortunatelly there is no way how to distinquish using conditional=
 byte
> > code instructions without source code. At the moment cobertura is n=
ot
> > using source code ...
> >
> > Jirka
> >
> > Tarun Modi napsal(a):
> > > Hi all,
> > > I have run ur tool on my class i.e.
> > >
> > > public class IfOnly {
> > >  4            public boolean ifmethod(boolean b) {
> > >  5  1          boolean a =3D false;
> > >  6  1          if (b) {
> > >  7  1              a =3D a || b;
> > >  8            }
> > >  9  1          return a;
> > >  10        }
> > >
> > > On line 6 it is showing Conditional Coverge 50%(1/2) and on line =
7 it
> > > is showing Conditional Coverage 50%(2/4)[each condition 50%,50%] =
.
> > > what i know about branch coverage is that branch are like if ,swi=
tch
> > > ,for ,while like statements..
> > > But u have counted line 6 & line 7 in ur total(class) branch cove=
rage
> > > i.e. 50%(3/6).
> > > what i have got reason behind that is in bytecode the or(||) of l=
ine 7
> > > is breakdown into "ifeq" and "ifne" ... same as "if" statement
> > > Is this is the reason that tool cant diffrentiate the "if" and
> > > "or(||)" statement..??
> > > Does ASM provide any class or feature that diffrences between the=
 above
> > two ..??
> > > Kindly reply to this mail and clarify my doubts...
> > > and if possible please explain it....
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > tarun
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------=
--------
> > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> > > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Cobertura-devel mailing list
> > > Cobertura-devel@...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 

Jiri Mares (mailto: Jiri.Mares@...)

SGksCkkgYW0gbm90IGNsZWFyIHdpdGggdGhpcyByZXBseS4uCmhhdmUgdSBtaXNzZWQgc29tZSBl
eHByZXNzaW9uIC4uPz8KYW5kIGluIGJ5dGVjb2RlIGNvbW1lbnRzIG9mIHNvdXJjZSBjb2RlIGFy
ZSBjbGVhcmVkLCBzbyBob3cgdG8gaWdub3JlLi4/Pz8KClRoYW5rcyBmb3IgZXhwbGFuYXRpb24g
aW4gcHJlY2NlZGVkIG1haWxzLi4uCgpSZWdhcmRzCnRhcnVuCgoKCk9uIDkvMTEvMDcsIEpp+O0g
TWFyZbkgPEppcmkuTWFyZXNAc2V6bmFtLmN6PiB3cm90ZToKPiBIaSB0YXJ1biwKPgo+IEkgaGF2
ZSBpZGVhIHRvIGNoZWNrIGZvciBzcGVjaWZpYyBzZXF1ZW5jZSBvZiBpbnN0cnVjdGlvbiB0byBp
Z25vcmUgaXQgYXMKPiBicmFuY2gsIGl0IGlzIHVzYWJsZSBmb3IgZXhwcmVzc2lvbnMgbGlrZQo+
Cj4gU3RyaW5nLmNsYXNzCj4KPiAoYWxzbyBjb250YWlucyBjb25kaXRpb25hbCBqdW1wKSBidXQg
bm90IGZvciBvdGhlcnMsIHRoZXJlZm9yZSBJJ20gbW9yZQo+IHRoaW5raW5nIGFib3V0IHVzaW5n
IHNvdXJjZSBjb2RlIGR1cmluZyBpbnN0cnVtZW50YXRpb24gdG9vLiBUaGlzIGFsc28KPiBjb25m
b3JtcyB3aXRoIHRoZSBpZGVhIHRvIHN1cHBvcnQgY2xvdmVyIGlnbm9yZSBjb21tZW50cyBhbmQg
cmVzb2x2ZSBtYW55Cj4gb3RoZXIgcHJvYmxlbXMgKGVnLiBhdXRvZ2VuZXJhdGVkIGNvZGUgdGhh
dCBpcyBnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYXMgY29kZSBvbiBsaW5lIDEKPiBpbiBzb3VyY2UgY29kZSBldGMpLgo+
Cj4gSmlya2EKPgo+ID4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tIFD5dm9kbu0genBy4XZhIC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQo+
ID4gT2Q6IFRhcnVuIE1vZGkgPG1vZGkudGFydW5AZ21haWwuY29tPgo+ID4gUPhlZG3sdDogUmU6
IFtDb2JlcnR1cmEtZGV2ZWxdIEJyYW5jaCBDb3ZlcmFnZSBSZWFzb24KPiA+IERhdHVtOiAxMS45
LjIwMDcgMDk6MDY6MzYKPiA+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t
LS0KPiA+IEhpIEFsbCwKPiA+IFRoYW5rcyBqb2huIGZvciByZXBseWluZyAuLi4KPiA+IElzbid0
IHRoZXJlIGFueSB3YXkgaW4gYnl0ZWNvZGUgdG8gZGlmZnJlbnRpYXRlIHRoZSB0d28uLi4/Pz8K
PiA+IFNvdXJjZSBjb2RlIGlzIHRoZSBvbmx5IHdheSAuLj8/Cj4gPiBEb2VzIEJDRUwgb3Igc29t
ZXRoaW5nIGVsc2UgY2FuIGhlbHAgaW4gdGhpcyAuLi4uaSBrbm93IHUgYXJlIG5vdCBhbgo+ID4g
ZXhwZXJ0IGluIGFzbSBvciBiY2VsLi4uLi4KPiA+IGJ1dCBpZiB1IGhhdmUgYW4gaWRlYSBvciBz
b21ldGhpbmcgLi4uCj4gPiBBbnkgY2xhcmlmaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBncmVhdGx5IGFwcHJlY2lhYmxl
Li4uCj4gPiBUaGFua3MgaW4gYWR2YW5jZS4uLgo+ID4KPiA+IFJlZ2FyZHMKPiA+IHRhcnVuCj4g
Pgo+ID4KPiA+Cj4gPgo+ID4KPiA+IE9uIDkvMTEvMDcsIEpvaG4gVy4gTGV3aXMgPEpvaG5XLkxl
d2lzQHNhcy5jb20+IHdyb3RlOgo+ID4gPgo+ID4gPiBZb3UgcmVhc29uaW5nIGlzIGdvb2QuICBD
b2JlcnR1cmEgdXNlcyB0aGUgYnl0ZWNvZGUgZGlyZWN0bHkuICBUaGF0Cj4gPiA+IHVuZm9ydHVu
YXRlbHkgbWVhbnMgdGhlcmUgYXJlIHNvbWUgbGluZXMgdGhhdCBzaG93IGNvbmRpdGlvbnMgYmVj
YXVzZQo+ID4gPiB0aGUgY29tcGlsZXIgaW5zZXJ0cyB0aGVtLgo+ID4gPgo+ID4gPiBJJ20gbm90
IGFuIEFTTSBleHBlcnQsIGJ1dCBJIGRvdWJ0IGl0IHByb3ZpZGVzIGEgd2F5IG9mIGRpZmZlcmVu
dGlhdGluZwo+ID4gPiBiZXR3ZWVuIHRoZSB0d28uICBJIHdvdWxkIHRoaW5rIHRoZSBieXRlY29k
ZSB3b3VsZCBoYXZlIHRvIHN0b3JlCj4gPiA+IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIG9uIHdoYXQgdGhlIHNvdXJj
ZSBsb29rZWQgbGlrZS4KPiA+ID4KPiA+ID4gSm9obgo+ID4gPgo+ID4gPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFs
IE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQo+ID4gPiBGcm9tOiBjb2JlcnR1cmEtZGV2ZWwtYm91bmNlc0BsaXN0cy5z
b3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5uZXQKPiA+ID4gW21haWx0bzpjb2JlcnR1cmEtZGV2ZWwtYm91bmNlc0BsaXN0
cy5zb3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5uZXRdIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZgo+ID4gPiBUYXJ1biBNb2RpCj4gPiA+IFNl
bnQ6IE1vbmRheSwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDEwLCAyMDA3IDU6MzQgQU0KPiA+ID4gVG86IGNvYmVydHVy
YS1kZXZlbEBsaXN0cy5zb3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5uZXQKPiA+ID4gU3ViamVjdDogW0NvYmVydHVyYS1k
ZXZlbF0gQnJhbmNoIENvdmVyYWdlIFJlYXNvbgo+ID4gPgo+ID4gPiBIaSBhbGwsCj4gPiA+IEkg
aGF2ZSBydW4gdXIgdG9vbCBvbiBteSBjbGFzcyBpLmUuCj4gPiA+Cj4gPiA+IHB1YmxpYyBjbGFz
cyBJZk9ubHkgewo+ID4gPiAgNCAgICAgICAgICAgIHB1YmxpYyBib29sZWFuIGlmbWV0aG9kKGJv
b2xlYW4gYikgewo+ID4gPiAgNSAgMSAgICAgICAgICBib29sZWFuIGEgPSBmYWxzZTsKPiA+ID4g
IDYgIDEgICAgICAgICAgaWYgKGIpIHsKPiA+ID4gIDcgIDEgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGEgPSBhIHx8
IGI7Cj4gPiA+ICA4ICAgICAgICAgICAgfQo+ID4gPiAgOSAgMSAgICAgICAgICByZXR1cm4gYTsK
PiA+ID4gIDEwICAgICAgICB9Cj4gPiA+Cj4gPiA+IE9uIGxpbmUgNiBpdCBpcyBzaG93aW5nIENv
bmRpdGlvbmFsIENvdmVyZ2UgNTAlKDEvMikgYW5kIG9uIGxpbmUgNyBpdCBpcwo+ID4gPiBzaG93
aW5nIENvbmRpdGlvbmFsIENvdmVyYWdlIDUwJSgyLzQpW2VhY2ggY29uZGl0aW9uIDUwJSw1MCVd
IC4KPiA+ID4gd2hhdCBpIGtub3cgYWJvdXQgYnJhbmNoIGNvdmVyYWdlIGlzIHRoYXQgYnJhbmNo
IGFyZSBsaWtlIGlmICxzd2l0Y2gKPiA+ID4gLGZvciAsd2hpbGUgbGlrZSBzdGF0ZW1lbnRzLi4K
PiA+ID4gQnV0IHUgaGF2ZSBjb3VudGVkIGxpbmUgNiAmIGxpbmUgNyBpbiB1ciB0b3RhbChjbGFz
cykgYnJhbmNoIGNvdmVyYWdlCj4gPiA+IGkuZS4gNTAlKDMvNikuCj4gPiA+IHdoYXQgaSBoYXZl
IGdvdCByZWFzb24gYmVoaW5kIHRoYXQgaXMgaW4gYnl0ZWNvZGUgdGhlIG9yKHx8KSBvZiBsaW5l
IDcKPiA+ID4gaXMgYnJlYWtkb3duIGludG8gImlmZXEiIGFuZCAiaWZuZSIgLi4uIHNhbWUgYXMg
ImlmIiBzdGF0ZW1lbnQgSXMgdGhpcwo+ID4gPiBpcyB0aGUgcmVhc29uIHRoYXQgdG9vbCBjYW50
IGRpZmZyZW50aWF0ZSB0aGUgImlmIiBhbmQgIm9yKHx8KSIKPiA+ID4gc3RhdGVtZW50Li4/Pwo+
ID4gPiBEb2VzIEFTTSBwcm92aWRlIGFueSBjbGFzcyBvciBmZWF0dXJlIHRoYXQgZGlmZnJlbmNl
cyBiZXR3ZWVuIHRoZSBhYm92ZQo+ID4gPiB0d28gLi4/Pwo+ID4gPiBLaW5kbHkgcmVwbHkgdG8g
dGhpcyBtYWlsIGFuZCBjbGFyaWZ5IG15IGRvdWJ0cy4uLgo+ID4gPiBhbmQgaWYgcG9zc2libGUg
cGxlYXNlIGV4cGxhaW4gaXQuLi4uCj4gPiA+Cj4gPiA+Cj4gPiA+IFJlZ2FyZHMKPiA+ID4gdGFy
dW4KPiA+ID4KPiA+ID4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t
LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tCj4gPiA+IC0KPiA+ID4gVGhpcyBTRi5uZXQg
ZW1haWwgaXMgc3BvbnNvcmVkIGJ5OiBNaWNyb3NvZnQgRGVmeSBhbGwgY2hhbGxlbmdlcy4KPiA+
ID4gTWljcm9zb2Z0KFIpIFZpc3VhbCBTdHVkaW8gMjAwNS4KPiA+ID4gaHR0cDovL2Nsay5hdGRt
dC5jb20vTVJUL2dvL3ZzZTAxMjAwMDAwNzBtcnQvZGlyZWN0LzAxLwo+ID4gPiBfX19fX19fX19f
X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwo+ID4gPiBDb2JlcnR1cmEtZGV2
ZWwgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0Cj4gPiA+IENvYmVydHVyYS1kZXZlbEBsaXN0cy5zb3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5u
ZXQKPiA+ID4gaHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5zb3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5uZXQvbGlzdHMvbGlzdGluZm8vY29i
ZXJ0dXJhLWRldmVsCj4gPiA+Cj4gPgo+ID4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t
LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQo+ID4gVGhpcyBTRi5u
ZXQgZW1haWwgaXMgc3BvbnNvcmVkIGJ5OiBNaWNyb3NvZnQKPiA+IERlZnkgYWxsIGNoYWxsZW5n
ZXMuIE1pY3Jvc29mdChSKSBWaXN1YWwgU3R1ZGlvIDIwMDUuCj4gPiBodHRwOi8vY2xrLmF0ZG10
LmNvbS9NUlQvZ28vdnNlMDEyMDAwMDA3MG1ydC9kaXJlY3QvMDEvCj4gPiBfX19fX19fX19fX19f
X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwo+ID4gQ29iZXJ0dXJhLWRldmVsIG1h
aWxpbmcgbGlzdAo+ID4gQ29iZXJ0dXJhLWRldmVsQGxpc3RzLnNvdXJjZWZvcmdlLm5ldAo+ID4g
aHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5zb3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5uZXQvbGlzdHMvbGlzdGluZm8vY29iZXJ0dXJhLWRl
dmVsCj4gPgo+ID4KPiA+Cj4KPiBKaXJpIE1hcmVzIChtYWlsdG86IEppcmkuTWFyZXNAc2V6bmFt
LmN6KQo+Cg==

Jirka is talking about looking for special sequences of instructions in =
byte code that the compiler creates for expressions like "String.class".

Obviously that can be tricky, so he seems to be preferring the way =
Clover looks at source files instead of bytecode.  This allows you to =
mark your source with special comments that tell Clover to not record =
information for certain blocks of code.  It also keeps you away from =
having line 1 show up as uncovered due to autogenerated code.  And, it =
would also help you ignore the conditionals the compiler inserts for =
instructions such as "String.class".

John

-----Original Message-----
From: cobertura-devel-bounces@... =
[mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of =
Tarun Modi
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 3:01 AM
To: Ji=F8=ED Mare=B9
Cc: cobertura-devel@...
Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason

Hi,
I am not clear with this reply..
have u missed some expression ..??
and in bytecode comments of source code are cleared, so how to =
ignore..???

Thanks for explanation in precceded mails...

Regards
tarun



On 9/11/07, Ji=F8=ED Mare=B9 <Jiri.Mares@...> wrote:
> Hi tarun,
>
> I have idea to check for specific sequence of instruction to ignore it =
as
> branch, it is usable for expressions like
>
> String.class
>
> (also contains conditional jump) but not for others, therefore I'm =
more
> thinking about using source code during instrumentation too. This also
> conforms with the idea to support clover ignore comments and resolve =
many
> other problems (eg. autogenerated code that is generated as code on =
line 1
> in source code etc).
>
> Jirka
>
> > ------------ P=F9vodn=ED zpr=E1va ------------
> > Od: Tarun Modi <modi.tarun@...>
> > P=F8edm=ECt: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason
> > Datum: 11.9.2007 09:06:36
> > ----------------------------------------
> > Hi All,
> > Thanks john for replying ...
> > Isn't there any way in bytecode to diffrentiate the two...???
> > Source code is the only way ..??
> > Does BCEL or something else can help in this ....i know u are not an
> > expert in asm or bcel.....
> > but if u have an idea or something ...
> > Any clarification is greatly appreciable...
> > Thanks in advance...
> >
> > Regards
> > tarun
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/11/07, John W. Lewis <JohnW.Lewis@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > You reasoning is good.  Cobertura uses the bytecode directly.  =
That
> > > unfortunately means there are some lines that show conditions =
because
> > > the compiler inserts them.
> > >
> > > I'm not an ASM expert, but I doubt it provides a way of =
differentiating
> > > between the two.  I would think the bytecode would have to store
> > > information on what the source looked like.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: cobertura-devel-bounces@...
> > > [mailto:cobertura-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf =
Of
> > > Tarun Modi
> > > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 5:34 AM
> > > To: cobertura-devel@...
> > > Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Reason
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > > I have run ur tool on my class i.e.
> > >
> > > public class IfOnly {
> > >  4            public boolean ifmethod(boolean b) {
> > >  5  1          boolean a =3D false;
> > >  6  1          if (b) {
> > >  7  1              a =3D a || b;
> > >  8            }
> > >  9  1          return a;
> > >  10        }
> > >
> > > On line 6 it is showing Conditional Coverge 50%(1/2) and on line 7 =
it is
> > > showing Conditional Coverage 50%(2/4)[each condition 50%,50%] .
> > > what i know about branch coverage is that branch are like if =
,switch
> > > ,for ,while like statements..
> > > But u have counted line 6 & line 7 in ur total(class) branch =
coverage
> > > i.e. 50%(3/6).
> > > what i have got reason behind that is in bytecode the or(||) of =
line 7
> > > is breakdown into "ifeq" and "ifne" ... same as "if" statement Is =
this
> > > is the reason that tool cant diffrentiate the "if" and "or(||)"
> > > statement..??
> > > Does ASM provide any class or feature that diffrences between the =
above
> > > two ..??
> > > Kindly reply to this mail and clarify my doubts...
> > > and if possible please explain it....
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > tarun
> > >
> > > =
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -
> > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges.
> > > Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Cobertura-devel mailing list
> > > Cobertura-devel@...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
> > >
> >
> > =
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=

> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cobertura-devel mailing list
> > Cobertura-devel@...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
> >
> >
> >
>
> Jiri Mares (mailto: Jiri.Mares@...)
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=

This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Cobertura-devel mailing list
Cobertura-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel

Hi Marco,

this could really be problem, for instrumentation you have to have asm 
and asm-tree on your classpath and the version is 2.2.1.

You can specify this jar to classpath just for instrumentation, they are 
used neither during test running (you can use your existing asm and 
asm-attr jars) nor report generation.

Jirka

marco.mistroni@... napsal(a):
> 
> hello,
>         well after a while i realized that problem might be with asm..
> i am using cobertura-1.9.
> in my project i have *already* following files
> - asm.jar (don#t know which version as the downloaded file has no version)
> - asm-attrs.jar
> 
> so obviously those will clash with asm jars needed by cobertura..
> i think problem is my environment, i'll try to sort it out and 
> eventually get back to the list if i m stuck
> 
> thanks and regars
>  marco
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Internet*
> *Jiri.Mares@...*
> 
> 07/09/2007 18:37
> 
> 	
> To
> 	Marco MISTRONI
> cc
> 	cobertura-devel
> Subject
> 	Re: [Cobertura-devel] error wtih instrumented classes
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> what version of cobertura and what version of asm are you using?
> 
> Jirka
> 
> marco.mistroni@... napsal(a):
>  >
>  > hi all,
>  >   i have a webapp developed using jdk 1.5.
>  > currently we are using emma for test-coverage, but as we would like to
>  > implement some sort of coverage-check,  we
>  > decided to try out cobertura.
>  > Unfortunatley, while running coberturan in my ant task i got a nasty
>  > exception and i havent been able
>  > to find what is hte problem (especially because i have limited web
>  > access @work)
>  >
>  > i'll appreciate if someone can help me out..
>  > For every class that i am trying to instrument i am receiving this
>  > exception :
>  >
>  > [cobertura-instrument] java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unknown
>  > attribute typ
>  > e Signature
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at org.objectweb.asm.Attribute.put(Unknown 
> Source)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at
>  > org.objectweb.asm.ClassWriter.visitField(Unknown Sour
>  > ce)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at
>  > org.objectweb.asm.ClassAdapter.visitField(Unknown Sou
>  > rce)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at org.objectweb.asm.ClassReader.accept(Unknown
>  > Source)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at org.objectweb.asm.ClassReader.accept(Unknown
>  > Source)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at
>  > net.sourceforge.cobertura.instrument.Main.addInstrume
>  > ntationToSingleClass(Main.java:358)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at
>  > net.sourceforge.cobertura.instrument.Main.addInstrume
>  > ntation(Main.java:416)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at
>  > net.sourceforge.cobertura.instrument.Main.parseArgume
>  > nts(Main.java:492)
>  > [cobertura-instrument]  at
>  > net.sourceforge.cobertura.instrument.Main.main(Main.j
>  >
>  >
>  > can anyone help me out pls?
>  >
>  > thanks in advance and regards
>  >  marco
>  >
>  >
>  > This communication is confidential, may be privileged and is meant 
> only for the intended recipient.  If you are
>  > not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply and 
> delete this message from your system.  Any
>  > unauthorised dissemination, distribution or copying hereof is prohibited.
>  > BNP Paribas Fund Services UK Limited, BNP Paribas Trust Corporation 
> UK Limited, BNP Paribas UK Limited,
>  > BNP Paribas Commodity Futures Ltd and Investment Fund Services 
> Limited are authorised and regulated by
>  > the Financial Services Authority.
>  > BNP Paribas, BNP Paribas Securities Services and BNP Paribas Private 
> Bank are authorised by the CECEI
>  > and AMF.  BNP Paribas London Branch, BNP Paribas Securities Services 
> London Branch and BNP Paribas
>  > Private Bank London Branch are regulated by the Financial Services 
> Authority for the conduct of their UK
>  > business.  BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch is also a 
> member of the London Stock Exchange.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >
>  > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
>  > Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
>  > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
>  > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
>  >
>  >
>  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Cobertura-devel mailing list
>  > Cobertura-devel@...
>  > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
> 
> 
> This communication is confidential, may be privileged and is meant only for the intended recipient.  If you are 
> not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message from your system.  Any 
> unauthorised dissemination, distribution or copying hereof is prohibited.
> BNP Paribas Fund Services UK Limited, BNP Paribas Trust Corporation UK Limited, BNP Paribas UK Limited, 
> BNP Paribas Commodity Futures Ltd and Investment Fund Services Limited are authorised and regulated by 
> the Financial Services Authority.
> BNP Paribas, BNP Paribas Securities Services and BNP Paribas Private Bank are authorised by the CECEI 
> and AMF.  BNP Paribas London Branch, BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch and BNP Paribas 
> Private Bank London Branch are regulated by the Financial Services Authority for the conduct of their UK 
> business.  BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch is also a member of the London Stock Exchange.
> 
>