[TIP] Coverage.py 4.1b2: re-written branch measurement

Ned Batchelder ned at nedbatchelder.com
Thu Jan 28 05:00:47 PST 2016

On 1/25/16 6:16 AM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On 1/25/16 6:11 AM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>> On 1/24/16 9:49 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>> On Jan 23, 2016, at 08:08 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>>> Try it, let me know what you think:https://pypi.python.org/pypi/coverage/4.1b2
>>> I haven't done a detailed analysis of the output, but it's definitely
>>> different.  I ran both the stable and pre-release versions over the Mailman 3
>>> core's git master head.  Here are the totals:
>>> Name                                                                               Stmts   Miss Branch BrPart  Cover   Missing
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> TOTAL (stable)                                                                     14386   1127   4377    463    90%
>>> TOTAL (pre-release)                                                                12456    954   3350    309    91%
>>> So I find it interesting that there are now fewer total number of statements,
>>> with correspondingly lower totals on the other values.  Except total
>>> coverage.  Yay!  I get to claim a little boost with no extra work. :)
>>> Is there an easy way to compare the different results, considering it's
>>> reporting on almost 300 files?
>> It might be a bit rough, but you can get a pretty dump of the raw 
>> collected data:
>>     $ python -m coverage.data .the_coverage_data_file
> Oops: add -c to sort everything:
>     $ python -m coverage.data -c .the_coverage_data_file

Double-oops: this isn't useful, it only shows the difference in what 
branches were *measured*.  It won't show you the difference in the 
branches analyzed, and therefore new missing branches.

The XML report will be the best way to see the differences.  You can 
remove some of the noise with:  sed 's/-rate="[0-9.]*"//g'

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.idyll.org/pipermail/testing-in-python/attachments/20160128/eff982ea/attachment.html>

More information about the testing-in-python mailing list