From harmony-dev-return-18145-apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Fri Nov 03 16:38:09 2006 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 65209 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2006 16:38:07 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Nov 2006 16:38:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 89422 invoked by uid 500); 3 Nov 2006 16:38:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 89390 invoked by uid 500); 3 Nov 2006 16:38:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 89381 invoked by uid 99); 3 Nov 2006 16:38:15 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Nov 2006 08:38:15 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [69.9.190.6] (HELO lox.whirlycott.com) (69.9.190.6) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Nov 2006 08:37:57 -0800 Received: (qmail 19857 invoked by uid 1016); 3 Nov 2006 16:37:36 -0000 Received: from 70.36.208.192 by lox.whirlycott.com (envelope-from , uid 1009) with qmail-scanner-1.25 (clamdscan: 0.87.1/1179. Clear:RC:1(70.36.208.192):. Processed in 0.066483 secs); 03 Nov 2006 16:37:36 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: stefano@apache.org via lox.whirlycott.com X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.25 (Clear:RC:1(70.36.208.192):. Processed in 0.066483 secs) Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.106?) (stefano@ormaz.it@70.36.208.192) by lox.whirlycott.com with ESMTPA; 3 Nov 2006 16:37:36 -0000 Message-ID: <454B7050.9000908@apache.org> Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 08:37:36 -0800 From: Stefano Mazzocchi User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Macintosh/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org CC: stuart.a.ballard@gmail.com Subject: Re: Japi diffs for harmony References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Stuart, I'm a *huge* fan of your Japi diffs (I admit that I have a sort of obsessive compulsion about it, getting happy with every small percentage increase and sad when it decreases). That said, I have a few questions to ask, see below. Stuart Ballard wrote: > Japi diff jdk15 vs harmony: > Full results: > http://www.kaffe.org/~stuart/japi/htmlout/h-jdk15-harmony.html > > Changes since last run: > > -Comparison run at Thu Nov 2 13:05:30 2006 GMT > -jdk15 API scanned at 2006/11/02 05:19:25 EST > -harmony API scanned at 2006/11/02 06:15:37 GMT > +Comparison run at Fri Nov 3 13:06:47 2006 GMT > +jdk15 API scanned at 2006/11/03 05:19:33 EST > +harmony API scanned at 2006/11/03 11:15:31 GMT > -javax.rmi.ssl: 100% missing > +javax.rmi.ssl: 100% good > -javax.swing.plaf.metal: 98.8% good, 1.19% missing > +javax.swing.plaf.metal: 99.98% good, 0.01% missing > -Total: 94.59% good, 0.06% minor, 0.03% bad, 5.3% missing, 0.02% abs.add > +Total: 94.66% good, 0.06% minor, 0.03% bad, 5.23% missing, 0.02% abs.add > -Packages: 11 missing. > -Classes: 41 minor, 2 bad, 53 missing. > +Packages: 10 missing. > +Classes: 41 minor, 2 bad, 52 missing. > -javax.rmi.ssl: > -Missing > -package javax.rmi.ssl: missing in harmony > - > -class javax.swing.plaf.metal.OceanTheme: missing in harmony It tells me there are 10 packages and 52 classes missing. Great. Then it gives me a percentage. Who is that percentage calculated? Is it by class coverage? method coverage? package coverage? a weighted sum of all the above? > Japi diff harmony vs jdk15: > Full results: > http://www.kaffe.org/~stuart/japi/htmlout/h-harmony-jdk15.html Ok, now it's the reverse... > Changes since last run: > > -Comparison run at Thu Nov 2 13:08:18 2006 GMT > -harmony API scanned at 2006/11/02 06:15:37 GMT > -jdk15 API scanned at 2006/11/02 05:19:25 EST > +Comparison run at Fri Nov 3 13:09:50 2006 GMT > +harmony API scanned at 2006/11/03 11:15:31 GMT > +jdk15 API scanned at 2006/11/03 05:19:33 EST > +javax.rmi.ssl: 100% good > -javax.swing.plaf.metal: 99.34% good, 0.62% minor, 0.03% missing > > -Total: 90.88% good, 0.28% minor, 0.13% bad, 8.69% missing, 0% abs.add > +Total: 90.89% good, 0.28% minor, 0.13% bad, 8.69% missing, 0% abs.add How is it possible that jdk15 vs harmony is 94.66% and harmony vs jdk15 is 90.88% Also in jdk vs harmony we get that javax.swing.plaf.metal: 99.98% good, 0.01% missing while in harmony vs jdk we get that javax.swing.plaf.metal: 99.34% good, 0.61% minor, 0.03% missing Close, clearly, but why should they be different? Thanks in advance for any insight. Ah, also, would it be possible to have a list of the percentage over time? It would be very interesting to plot the evolution of coverage over time. -- Stefano.