db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mohamed Nufail (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DERBY-5851) Inconsistent code coverage shown for LogicalPreparedStatement40
Date Fri, 13 Jul 2012 06:25:34 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5851?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13413521#comment-13413521
] 

Mohamed Nufail commented on DERBY-5851:
---------------------------------------

I tried out the suggestions.

1) Methods which are not correctly instrumented are those which are implemented in PreparedStatement40.
What LogicalPreparedStatement40 does is forward all calls to the underlying physical prepared
statement. So those which are implemented in PreparedStatement40 are causing this problem
while those in PreparedStatement and Statement classes work fine. Also all those methods in
PreparedStatement40 throw exceptions as they are not supported. 

2) Emma and JaCoCo reports are the same. They miss same set of methods.

3) Siddharth has started a thread on JaCoCo mailing list at https://sourceforge.net/projects/eclemma/forums/forum/614869/topic/5425816

                
> Inconsistent code coverage shown for LogicalPreparedStatement40
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-5851
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5851
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Mohamed Nufail
>            Assignee: Mohamed Nufail
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: derby-5851-CPdecorator.patch
>
>
> I tried running org.apache.derbyTesting.functionTests.tests.jdbc4.PreparedStatementTest
with a connectionCPDecorator in a JDBC4 environment. So this should actually run the test
with LogicalPreparedStatement40 statements. 
> But in code coverage report methods such as setNClob show no coverage in LogicalPreparedStatement40
class. But in PreparedStatement40 class all these methods are shown as covered. Actually those
method calls should go to PreparedStatement40 through LogicalPreparedStatement40. But it is
not shown in emma code coverage report.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Mime
View raw message