Mailing-List: contact users-help@maven.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Maven Users List" <users@maven.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of paulus.benedictus@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.213.172 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: paulus.benedictus@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <9e5201cf2831$52f17c60$f8d47520$@berthonneau.com>
References: <9e5201cf2831$52f17c60$f8d47520$@berthonneau.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:36:27 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <CABLGb9yyWxO8om2YE2Y-3v0RwLgB4RmY6cG9UK330DY4UVGHpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Code coverage with debug logs: 100% branch coverage not
 possible?...
From: Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org>
To: Maven Users List <users@maven.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6bdfcf3669404f23b865d

--047d7bd6bdfcf3669404f23b865d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

IIRC, there should be an option in Emma/Cobertura that allows you to
exclude coverage on certain classes. So if you can exclude your log4j
classes (you don't really want to test your logging, do you?), then you
should be able to raise your percentage.


On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Beno=EEt Berthonneau
<benoit@berthonneau.com>wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I need your opinion/way to tackle the following problem:
>
> In many projects we use a Logger (doesn't matter which implementation). I=
t
> is often recommend to test if the debug level is activated before logging=
 a
> debug trace like the following:
>
> if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
>
>     logger.debug("blah " + i + " in the loop that contains " + max);
>
> }
>
>
>
> Now when you run unit tests on this kind of code you need to make a choic=
e:
> run tests with INFO level or run tests with ALL traces activated. I choos=
e
> the second option in order to:
>
> *         Check that debug traces doesn't throw unwanted exception (like
> NPE)
>
> *         Have a better code coverage in term of covered lines
>
>
>
> But in term of branches coverage we could never have a 100% :(
>
>
>
> To me the only way to cover this is to run the tests suite 2 times: one
> with
> INFO traces configured, and another one with ALL traces activated.
>
> Did you face this issue and how did you solve it ?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Beno=EEt.
>
>


--=20
Cheers,
Paul

--047d7bd6bdfcf3669404f23b865d--