commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Al Chou <>
Subject Re: [math] Clover Test Coverage
Date Sat, 22 Nov 2003 20:57:26 GMT
--- "Mark R. Diggory" <> wrote:
> I have to say, I'm very impressed with the clover test coverage tool. 
> This report is very cool and shows us exactly where coverage is low.
> However, I'm not convinced that test coverage = quality assurance. One 
> could easily write tests that cause test coverage to score high while 
> not being very informative in and of themselves.

That's one of the overarching lessons in software testing.  There are some
pre-existing tests for commons.lang.StringUtils.split(*) that pass regardless
of how I order two operations in code I submitted in a patch yesterday.  So
while the tests seem to exercise those methods and thus provide test coverage,
only one out of the three relevant tests is sensitive to those changes, which
makes me nervous about both the tests and what the lack of sensitivity to
changes says about the code (both the pre-existing code and my patch), because
it seems like the logic should be different depending on the task ordering.

You may be interested in reading "How to Misuse Code Coverage" from Brian
Marick's .


Albert Davidson Chou

    Get answers to Mac questions at .

Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message