On Jun 10, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
On 06/10/10 09:25 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi folks,
One of the main goals of the upcoming Sage 5.0 release is to get
doctest coverage of the Sage library up to at least 90%. As of Sage
4.4.4.alpha0, the overall weighted coverage is 82.7%.
Seems we are a long way off.
It seems to me, rather than pick a number like 90%, the areas should
be targeted carefully.
90% is a very nice global goal to have--it's something concrete to
shoot for while still letting everyone work on what they like/think is
most important. That being said, I agree with you that I'd rather
people write tests for more valuable areas rather than easy ones is
certainly worthwhile.
To get a sense
of which modules in the Sage library need work on their coverage
scores, you could use the coverage script as follows:
$ ./sage -coverage /path/to/module.py[x]
Or you could do the following to get the coverage scores of all
modules, including a coverage summary:
$ ./sage -coverageall
You might be interested in knowing which modules have a certain
coverage percentage, in which case you could save the output of
-coverageall to a text file and then grep that file for certain
coverage scores. At this repository [1] is a script to generate
various types of coverage analysis reports. You can also find the
script at [3]. The script currently supports the following reports
* The coverage summary of all modules.
* Modules with 100% coverage.
* Modules with zero coverage.
I don't really understand these docs tests well, but to me at least,
concentrating on modules which have zero coverage would seem best,
even if only one doctest/module is added. My logic being something
could be totally broken, and we would never know about it. At least
if there is even one doctest, it shows it is not totally broken.
(Though one could argue being totally broken is better than being
partially broken. At least one finds out in use.)
+1, though of course some files (e.g. tachyon) are indirectly tested,
so it's hard to tell just looking at the numbers alone.
- Robert
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
