On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 06:56:50PM -0400, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
> As I recall [I may be wrong], some of your snippets were under
> /5.8.0/... isn't < 5.8.2 considered squirrelly (technical term) under
> Devel::Cover?
Yes, you're right, I do recommend a minimum version of 5.8.2. It would
b
Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
On Jun 3, 2005, at 1:40 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Certainly. Of course, it's always possible and quite likely that there
is a bug in my code somewhere. But there is also a chance that I am
conflating two ops, since I have yet to come up with a way to uniquely
identify
On Jun 3, 2005, at 1:40 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Certainly. Of course, it's always possible and quite likely that there
is a bug in my code somewhere. But there is also a chance that I am
conflating two ops, since I have yet to come up with a way to uniquely
identify an op (suggestions welcome
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 03:00:03PM -0700, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
> On Jun 1, 2005, at 2:35 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
>
> >Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
> >>I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has
> >>to be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
> >>stmt
On Jun 1, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 04:00:12PM -0700, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has to
be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
You might find it slightly easier with the tex
On Jun 1, 2005, at 2:35 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has
to be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
stmt branch cond sub time code
221862 100 100
Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has to
be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
stmt branch cond sub time code
221862 100 100 _1613639 next if ($line
=~ /^\
On Jun 1, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
If you look at the subroutine coverage page, it claims that there is a
BEGIN block uncovered at that line.
That does sound a little strange. Are you able to produce an example
showing this problem?
No. In fact, it isn't consistent. Last n
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 04:00:12PM -0700, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
> I'm looking at a bit of output from Devel::Cover that I imagine has to
> be a bug. I'll try my best to reproduce the HTML output:
You might find it slightly easier with the textual report (cover -report
text), or does the prob
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 08:41:08PM -0400, Vsevolod (Simon) Ilyushchenko wrote:
> >The problem occurs because Devel::Cover overrides some of B::Deparse's
> >subs, but when you go calling them in a program it gets upset. The
> >solution is to only override the subs for as long as is necessary. The
Absolutely correct. I was able to reduce the code to:
require B::Deparse;
B::Deparse->new->coderef2text(sub {})
The problem occurs because Devel::Cover overrides some of B::Deparse's
subs, but when you go calling them in a program it gets upset. The
solution is to only override the subs f
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 12:45:26PM -0400, Vsevolod (Simon) Ilyushchenko wrote:
> Hi,
Hello,
> I've run into "Can't call method "add_statement" on an undefined value"
> running Devel::Cover. Apologies if this was reported before, but the
> list archive is not searchable. I am using perl 5.8.4 a
--- Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the key is that it is perl version 5.6.1. I can reproduce the
> problem on a stock 5.6.1 on linux (well, hacked just enough to get it to
> build).
Hmmm ... I saw this *after* my second ActiveState email.
> Actually, I wonder whether 5.6.1 sho
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 01:49:58PM -0700, Ovid wrote:
> After much research, I've managed to reduce a Devel::Cover bug down to
> a one-liner which only fails on one box. This box is unique because
> it's ActiveState Perl for Linux (not my choice!). However, that might
> be a red herring. My 'pe
FYI: I've managed to replicate this error on another ActiveState Perl linux box. The
Perl -V
information is the same, but the module list is quite a bit smaller. The only common
element that
I can find is ActiveState.
Cheers,
Ovid
=
Silence is Evilhttp://users.easystreet.com/
15 matches
Mail list logo
