RE: [Cobertura-devel] bug while merging

[Mark D. <Mar...@sa...>]

Hi!

Hopefully we've fixed this in CVS.  The way it's supposed to work now =
is, you merge two ProjectData classes together, which recursively merges =
all PackageData classes, which merges all SourceFileData classes, which =
merges all ClassData classes, which merges all LineData classes (by =
summing the hit counts for each line).

-Mark


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cob...@li...=20
> [mailto:cob...@li...] On=20
> Behalf Of Harish Prabhakara
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 12:18 PM
> To: cob...@li...
> Subject: [Cobertura-devel] bug while merging
>=20
> hi,
>=20
> We are trying to merge two cobertura.ser files which has the=20
> same code base.
> one cobertura.ser files is  created  when running junit and=20
> the other is
> created when weblogic server is stopped which are created in=20
> two different
> directories.
> Apparently when trying to merge we found that it is just=20
> overwriting the
> other. for e.g. Junit calls a Delegate class which happens to=20
> have a code
> coverage of 40%.
> This Delegate class calls the server classes and no Delegate=20
> class is called
> through the server. So the code coverage for this Delegate=20
> class is 0% in
> the cobertura.ser
> generated by the weblogic.
>=20
> Now when we are trying to merge this both ideally it should=20
> been given 40%
> but it gives 0%.  Going through the source code we found that in
> CoverageData.java
> we have a method which merges the two files as given below.=20
> 	public void merge(CoverageData coverageData)
> 	{	lines.putAll(coverageData.lines);
> 		conditionals.putAll(coverageData.conditionals);
> 		methodNamesAndDescriptors.addAll(coverageData
> 				.getMethodNamesAndDescriptors());
> 	}
> In the above code lines is a HashMap object
>=20
> The lines.putAll(coverageData.lines) just overwrites the data.=20
>=20
> The above method could be modified as given below.
>=20
> 	public void merge(CoverageData coverageData)
> 	{	Set keySet =3D lines. keySet();
>=20
> 		Iterator iterator =3D keySet.iterator();
> 		while(iterator.hasNext()) {
> 			Integer lineNumber =3D (Integer) iterator.next();
> 			LineInformation l1 =3D
> (LineInformation)lines.get(lineNumber);
> 			LineInformation l2 =3D
> (LineInformation)coverageData.lines.get(lineNumber);
> 			long hits1 =3D l1.getHits();
> 			long hits2 =3D l2.getHits();
>=20
> 			if(hits2>hits1) {
> 				lines.put(lineNumber,l2);
> 			}
> 		}
>=20
> 		//lines.putAll(coverageData.lines);
> 		conditionals.putAll(coverageData.conditionals);
> 		methodNamesAndDescriptors.addAll(coverageData
> 				.getMethodNamesAndDescriptors());
> 	}
>=20
>=20
> Let me know if anyone has a better solution.
>=20
> Regards
> Harish
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> >  -----Original Message-----
> > From: 	Harish Prabhakara =20
> > Sent:	Tuesday, May 17, 2005 4:04 PM
> > To:	'cob...@li...'
> > Cc:	Iyer, Tejas; Satyadarshi Mishra; Bothra, Naveen
> > Subject:	improper codecoverage report
> >=20
> > hi,
> >=20
> > We are trying to do a code coverage analysis for an=20
> application deployed
> > under Weblogic 8.1 server. The application is been tested
> > using Junit as well as HttpUnit Test Cases. While doing the=20
> code coverage
> > analysis we found that the code coverage is been
> > reported for those classes which has been called through Junit. Code
> > coverage for those Classes which are run under Weblogic=20
> > environment or under HttpUnit environment is not shown as=20
> covered. For
> > E.g. Let us say that we have got a Delegate class
> > which calls  a service. This service is an EJB which is=20
> been deployed in
> > the Weblogic server. This Ejb in turns calls some VOAssembler=20
> > classes and in turn calls the DAO classes.=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > The test case calls the SiteDelegate which internally finds=20
> the service
> > and executes the service.=20
> >=20
> > The build.xml does exactly as mentioned in the documentation.
> >=20
> > set the classpath for the cobertura.jar.
> > compile the java files.
> > Create instrumented classes over the compilation classes
> > set the classpath for the instrumented classes
> > run the testcase
> > create the report.
> >=20
> > On analysis of the report, we could find code coverage only=20
> for delegate
> > class and there no coverage is been reported for other classes such
> > as EJB, VOAssembler and DAO.=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > Kindly can you help in resolving this problem.
> >=20
> > Thanks and Regards
> > Harish
> >=20