Re: ECPG cleanup and fix for clang compile-time problem
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ECPG cleanup and fix for clang compile-time problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2039829.1713496312@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ECPG cleanup and fix for clang compile-time problem (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: ECPG cleanup and fix for clang compile-time problem
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2024-04-18 22:18:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> (If our code coverage tools worked on bison/flex stuff, >> maybe this'd be less scary ... but they don't.) > For bison coverage seems to work, see e.g.: Yeah, I'd just noticed that --- I had it in my head that we'd put LCOV_EXCL_START/STOP into bison files too, but nope they are only in flex files. That's good for this specific problem, because the code I'm worried about is all in the bison file. > around the scanner "body". Without that I get reasonable-looking, albeit not > very comforting, coverage for pgc.l as well. I was just looking locally at what I got by removing that, and sadly I don't think I believe it: there are a lot of places where it claims we hit lines we don't, and vice versa. That might be partially blamable on old tools on my RHEL8 workstation, but it sure seems that flex output confuses lcov to some extent. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: