From duke at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 17 06:11:50 2024
From: duke at openjdk.org (duke)
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 06:11:50 GMT
Subject: Withdrawn: 7903842: Negative coverage in report for records
In-Reply-To: <osOtSuNxX1uid2ooUuzo0jRE-6gN62ArnFgEI2wA6Us=.7c05336b-4071-49cd-882a-0557091ca1d5@github.com>
References: <osOtSuNxX1uid2ooUuzo0jRE-6gN62ArnFgEI2wA6Us=.7c05336b-4071-49cd-882a-0557091ca1d5@github.com>
Message-ID: <S-dUexDhJeU5iDDsAJotqxSMIweDb8vvUGvgPDKCpV0=.9e2ff16c-bb7f-4c9b-b5f5-e865b2d375e5@github.com>

On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 20:10:03 GMT, Leonid Kuskov <lkuskov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The Javap report had several issues marked in the picture below, which have been fixed:
> ![defectReport](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b8de7fc9-c59b-41f9-8300-700a1e24b533)
> The expected report is:
> ![fixedReport](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e7aa1ef4-3bed-46d8-80eb-a6e2c87a6da2)

This pull request has been closed without being integrated.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/48

From shurailine at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 06:39:14 2024
From: shurailine at openjdk.org (Alexandre Iline)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 06:39:14 GMT
Subject: RFR: New JDK coverage reports, refactoring
Message-ID: <yeIur6VRLmgk-scLSZR5Fd5XDgrL9t6kkFT7e7q-4II=.9fe2b64a-f88f-4d60-9048-6dbce1584f41@github.com>

File items. Which could be anything of which there is a set per file, for example, methods, fields.
Command line API.
UnchangedCodeFilter
More coverage comparison reports.
More JDK reports, JDK reports moved to a sub-package. More refactoring
Tests

-------------

Commit messages:
 - trailing space
 - formatting, comments
 - File items. Which could be anything of which there is a set per file, for example, methods, fields.

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/56/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jcov&pr=56&range=00
  Stats: 4033 lines in 42 files changed: 3673 ins; 236 del; 124 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/56.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jcov.git pull/56/head:pull/56

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/56

From lkuskov at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 19:28:49 2024
From: lkuskov at openjdk.org (Leonid Kuskov)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:28:49 GMT
Subject: RFR: New JDK coverage reports, refactoring
In-Reply-To: <yeIur6VRLmgk-scLSZR5Fd5XDgrL9t6kkFT7e7q-4II=.9fe2b64a-f88f-4d60-9048-6dbce1584f41@github.com>
References: <yeIur6VRLmgk-scLSZR5Fd5XDgrL9t6kkFT7e7q-4II=.9fe2b64a-f88f-4d60-9048-6dbce1584f41@github.com>
Message-ID: <v3cj-yYnbVqgZ_wCGDInmG5SiZ1c1CHHeIKvtJi5PuA=.1903b911-d1dc-4d9c-8d03-631b2b3f2650@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 01:46:44 GMT, Alexandre Iline <shurailine at openjdk.org> wrote:

> File items. Which could be anything of which there is a set per file, for example, methods, fields.
> Command line API.
> UnchangedCodeFilter
> More coverage comparison reports.
> More JDK reports, JDK reports moved to a sub-package. More refactoring
> Tests

Marked as reviewed by lkuskov (Reviewer).

-------------

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/56#pullrequestreview-2518205153

From shurailine at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 19:36:51 2024
From: shurailine at openjdk.org (Alexandre Iline)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:36:51 GMT
Subject: RFR: 7903842: Negative coverage in report for records
In-Reply-To: <osOtSuNxX1uid2ooUuzo0jRE-6gN62ArnFgEI2wA6Us=.7c05336b-4071-49cd-882a-0557091ca1d5@github.com>
References: <osOtSuNxX1uid2ooUuzo0jRE-6gN62ArnFgEI2wA6Us=.7c05336b-4071-49cd-882a-0557091ca1d5@github.com>
Message-ID: <iXmbGSu0Pea8qzWycL8gwxeUaUMLC6u9qDGAF-ToPHg=.0ce5daee-1bdd-4ec8-b481-42c113a8bc73@github.com>

On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 20:10:03 GMT, Leonid Kuskov <lkuskov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The Javap report had several issues marked in the picture below, which have been fixed:
> ![defectReport](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b8de7fc9-c59b-41f9-8300-700a1e24b533)
> The expected report is:
> ![fixedReport](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e7aa1ef4-3bed-46d8-80eb-a6e2c87a6da2)

I think it would be better to rename "line coverage" to "instruction coverage" in this report. Some other word can be used, but "instruction" is the best I can come up with.

The reasons are:
1. Line is associated with a source line.  What's listed in the reworked report are not lines, they are byte code instructions. One may argue that a line could correspond to a javap utility output line, but that is superficial.
2. If the column name the same as in a corresponding report with java code, first action of anybody looking on the report would be to compare the numbers. Compare line coverage from one report to the line coverage in the other report. Without knowledge that the report is showing something else, it is impossible to explain the numbers.

The test added by https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/CODETOOLS-7903867 is only checking that there is no negative coverage. An update to it is needed to check that the right coverage is reported.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/48#issuecomment-2557605833
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/48#issuecomment-2557607447

From shurailine at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 19:36:51 2024
From: shurailine at openjdk.org (Alexandre Iline)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:36:51 GMT
Subject: RFR: 7903842: Negative coverage in report for records
In-Reply-To: <iXmbGSu0Pea8qzWycL8gwxeUaUMLC6u9qDGAF-ToPHg=.0ce5daee-1bdd-4ec8-b481-42c113a8bc73@github.com>
References: <osOtSuNxX1uid2ooUuzo0jRE-6gN62ArnFgEI2wA6Us=.7c05336b-4071-49cd-882a-0557091ca1d5@github.com>
 <iXmbGSu0Pea8qzWycL8gwxeUaUMLC6u9qDGAF-ToPHg=.0ce5daee-1bdd-4ec8-b481-42c113a8bc73@github.com>
Message-ID: <iGHVJEesEsuFFZKnhcK2x6c9AJyWpLf7Z1j_MX6rtzY=.c72ece0f-4609-414a-bb75-542cc9d308a7@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:31:02 GMT, Alexandre Iline <shurailine at openjdk.org> wrote:

> I think it would be better to rename "line coverage" to "instruction coverage" in this report. Some other word can be used, but "instruction" is the best I can come up with.

@dbessono What are your thoughts on "line coverage" vs "instruction coverage"?

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/48#issuecomment-2557609603

From shurailine at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 19:38:46 2024
From: shurailine at openjdk.org (Alexandre Iline)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:38:46 GMT
Subject: Integrated: New JDK coverage reports, refactoring
In-Reply-To: <yeIur6VRLmgk-scLSZR5Fd5XDgrL9t6kkFT7e7q-4II=.9fe2b64a-f88f-4d60-9048-6dbce1584f41@github.com>
References: <yeIur6VRLmgk-scLSZR5Fd5XDgrL9t6kkFT7e7q-4II=.9fe2b64a-f88f-4d60-9048-6dbce1584f41@github.com>
Message-ID: <Q2ud8rok0ZdKaTHQ1jaiMuGg2E66QxbNsvthxc7aaWE=.f05f0fa2-c788-4e50-820b-3eda705ba5c1@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 01:46:44 GMT, Alexandre Iline <shurailine at openjdk.org> wrote:

> File items. Which could be anything of which there is a set per file, for example, methods, fields.
> Command line API.
> UnchangedCodeFilter
> More coverage comparison reports.
> More JDK reports, JDK reports moved to a sub-package. More refactoring
> Tests

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 4c278b8d
Author:    Alexandre Iline <shurailine at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/commit/4c278b8d0a771c09fb4dbebdcc924ec5a4170bf3
Stats:     4033 lines in 42 files changed: 3673 ins; 236 del; 124 mod

New JDK coverage reports, refactoring

Reviewed-by: lkuskov

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/56

From lkuskov at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 19:58:49 2024
From: lkuskov at openjdk.org (Leonid Kuskov)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:58:49 GMT
Subject: RFR: 7903842: Negative coverage in report for records
In-Reply-To: <osOtSuNxX1uid2ooUuzo0jRE-6gN62ArnFgEI2wA6Us=.7c05336b-4071-49cd-882a-0557091ca1d5@github.com>
References: <osOtSuNxX1uid2ooUuzo0jRE-6gN62ArnFgEI2wA6Us=.7c05336b-4071-49cd-882a-0557091ca1d5@github.com>
Message-ID: <0g5VseiKhxdyUPFboePjpmmH0ojUJInc68KNgu2qntY=.bd526a6c-ec1d-41be-846c-f082249c7d97@github.com>

On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 20:10:03 GMT, Leonid Kuskov <lkuskov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The Javap report had several issues marked in the picture below, which have been fixed:
> ![defectReport](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b8de7fc9-c59b-41f9-8300-700a1e24b533)
> The expected report is:
> ![fixedReport](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e7aa1ef4-3bed-46d8-80eb-a6e2c87a6da2)

The term 'code line' (line of 4.7.3. The Code Attribute) or the simplified 'line' is intuitively clear and sufficient to be used there. All lines that can't be covered in the javap report don't have green or red markings like comment lines in Java sources and are clearly excluded from the meaning of covered/non-covered.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jcov/pull/48#issuecomment-2557637339