xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D25985#580270, @zaks.anna wrote:
> Please, add multi-file tests and tests where a line is covered more than once.
Ok, I will add it in the next iteration.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp:262
+
+static void dumpCoverageInfo(llvm::SmallVectorImpl<char> &Path,
+ SourceManager &SM) {
----------------
zaks.anna wrote:
> Can this be a debug checker?
You mean the dumping part or also collecting the coverage? It can be a debug
checker if we add a new callback like "checkBasicBlockBegin". I did not want to
add such callback just for a debug check. However, it is possible to move only
the dumping part to a separate checker. What would you prefer?
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp:281
+ llvm::raw_os_ostream Out(OutFile);
+ Out << "-:0:Source:" << FE->getName() << '\n';
+ Out << "-:0:Runs:1\n";
----------------
zaks.anna wrote:
> What does '-' mean in this case? Why is it needed?
The `-` means lines without executable code. `######` means lines that contains
executable code but unexecuted. The lines that has "0" as the line number are
attributes to help the tools consume the gcov file.
================
Comment at: test/Analysis/record-coverage.cpp.expected:2
+// CHECK: -:4:int main() {
+// CHECK-NEXT: -:5: int i = 2;
+// CHECK-NEXT: 1:6: ++i;
----------------
zaks.anna wrote:
> Does '-' mean not covered? If so, why the first 2 statements are not covered?
There was an off by one error that I fixed.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D25985
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
