On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 07:26:45PM +0200, Johan Vromans wrote:
> [Quoting Paul Johnson, on April 10 2001, 00:08, in "New module: Devel::C"]
> > I think the name Devel::Cover might be appropriate. It is a shame that
> > a certain amount of confusion will probably ensue,
>
> How about a specialisation of Devel::Coverage, e.g.
> Devel::Coverage::RunOps?
Yes, a nice idea, but in this case the ops part is really just an
implementation detail. Since the ops information is there I'll probably
do something with it, but the main thrust of the module is standard code
coverage, and the ops will need to be mapped back to the high level
constructs: statements, branches, paths, conditions. Users shouldn't
care that I collect the data via ops. The collection mechanism may even
change.
I also plan for the backend output modules to be language neutral, that
is they should be able to display coverage data from other languages,
probably not even collected using Perl, but stored in a standard format.
I suspect that this module could ultimately be merged with
Devel::Coverage, but I wouldn't want to start down that path until I had
a decent back end, which is something for which Devel::Coverage is also
searching.
In short, I'm not convinced that a specialisation of Devel::Coverage is
appropriate. At least, I can't think of an appropriate specialisation.
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
