Re: [Cobertura-devel] Re: Cobertura 1.5

[Jeremy T. <jer...@gm...>]

1. okay, cool
2. agreed - will change
3. oops, you're right, it was for reference, forgot to remove
4. yeah, i'll remove the jar, too (i think that's the only dependency --=20
i'll check
5. i'll look to see where I did it -- not sure, but probably b/c my default=
=20
code template adds a default no-op constructor (something we do at work, so=
=20
the settings / habits carry over)
6. great suggestions - the kind of things I would normally do, not sure why=
=20
I didn't on this one
7. I'll add an assert so that we don't get any [potential] JUnit=20
warnings.... even though the main point of the test is a no-op, it's just t=
o=20
call methods

I'll look at his patch, too. I did all of this development offline Saturday=
,=20
so Saturday morning before I left the house, I saved the fr's and bugs from=
=20
SF to a text file, but forgot to grab the patches to use as reference /=20
starting point. Sorry to those of you who submitted patches that I forgot t=
o=20
grab. I will look at them before committing, though, and merge anything tha=
t=20
they include and I forgot.

Once I get these things done, I'll commit unless anyone objects before=20
that....

Until then,
Jeremy

On 8/1/05, Mark Doliner <Mar...@sa...> wrote:
>=20
> I'll number things for reference:
>=20
> 1. I just committed the ChangeLog typo fix to get it out of the way,=20
> thanks for catching that.
>=20
> 2. It might be better if "othersrc" was called "src2," instead. That way=
=20
> it would show up next to "src" in directory listings and people would not=
ice=20
> it more. It also allows for us to have "src3" and higher (I doubt that'll=
=20
> ever happen... but who knows).
>=20
> 3. You have a lot of code commented out in reporting.Main... It looks lik=
e=20
> most of it was replaced with other code, and I guess you were using it fo=
r=20
> reference, but I would definitely remove it before committing (if people=
=20
> want to see an older version of the code then they can check out an old=
=20
> revision from CVS).
>=20
> 4. I like that you stopped using gnu.getopt in reporting.Main. Getopt is=
=20
> kind of overkill, I think, and I'd like to remove that jar.
>=20
> 5. Is there any reason you're adding empty constructors ocassionally? I'v=
e=20
> just been implicitly using the default/parent's constructor.
>=20
> 6. In FileFinder.findFile you convert forward slashes to backslashes... I=
t=20
> seems like it would make more sense to do that in addSourceFilePath()=20
> instead. And also to create a String filePartReplaced or something before=
=20
> the loop in findFile instead of doing the search/replace for every=20
> iteration. And I'd also vote for converting back slashes to forward slash=
es,=20
> but I'm a Linux guy :-)
>=20
> 7. Your faux TestCase for SomeOtherClass doesn't have an assert, it seems=
=20
> like JUnit might warn against that?
>=20
> You might want to work with Grzegorz Lukasik or see if he does anything i=
n=20
> his patch that you might want to do in yours:
>=20
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=3Ddetail&aid=3D1245454&grou=
p_id=3D130558&atid=3D720017
>=20
> -Mark
>=20
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cob...@li...
> > [mailto:cob...@li...] On
> > Behalf Of Jeremy Thomerson
> > Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 10:26 PM
> > To: Mark Doliner
> > Cc: cob...@li...
> > Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Re: Cobertura 1.5
> >
> > I spent a few hours today making instrumentation and reporting work
> > with multiple source directories. Rather than committing it, I am
> > sending out the patch, asking for someone to review it. It also adds
> > a second directory of source (just one simple faux class) so that we
> > have the multiple filesets / multiple source directories in our
> > instrumentation and reporting build.
> >
> > I didn't have time to update any documentation that we have for usage,
> > so if someone could update that (assuming that everyone likes this
> > solution), that would be great. Also, I just realized that the
> > reporting task should be backwards-compatible with the old srcdir
> > attribute, but I don't think I remembered to do that with the
> > instrumentation task. If I didn't, but everyone likes this patch,
> > I'll commit these changes and add that to the instrumentation class
> > for backwards compatibility.
> >
> > Please let me know what you think.
> >
> > Jeremy Thomerson
> >
> > On 7/27/05, M C <mor...@ya...> wrote:
> > > Mark Doliner wrote:
> > > >Hi, I'm thinking about releasing Cobertura 1.5 soon.
> > > >It still doesn't supported multiple source
> > > directories >for reporting (I REALLY need to look at
> > > that patch), >or multiple class directories for
> > > instrumenting, but >there are a lot of other changes.
> > > >What do you guys think?
> > >
> > > IMHO Without the patch for multiple source directories
> > > I personally do not see the point of a release now.
> > > Better to wait for the real thing.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Morten
>=20
>=20
>