Re: [Xmlunit-general] Contribution to xmlunit-java

[Stefan B. <ste...@fr...>]

Hi Andy

Andy Kwok <hiu...@gm...> writes:

> Recently I have some time for contribution and I have checked the Jacoco
> coverage report for xmlUnit Java project,
>
> I wonder if it makes sense for me to write a few more tests to bring up the
> coverage first?

Back when Travis worked reliably we used to have coveralls reports and
have always been in the 92+ percentage range of coverage, so there
probably isn't that much untested code - at least I'd hope so.

https://coveralls.io/github/xmlunit/xmlunit

Please don't waste your time writing tests for trivial code like getters
and setters for properties and things like this. We are writing tests to
improve reliablity and catch regressions, not to make any statistics
happy.

I'm not sure whether coveralls is smarter than Jacoco. Some code paths
in core may only be covered by tests run in one of the other modules - I
don't believe the jacoco report would see that.

Cheers

        Stefan