On 12/9/2019 12:19 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 12:11 PM René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Am 09.12.19 um 16:36 schrieb Derrick Stolee: >>> René Scharfe 0bb313a5 xdiff: unignore changes in function context >>> xdiff/xemit.c >>> 0bb313a5 223) xchp->i1 + xchp->chg1 <= s1 && >>> 0bb313a5 224) xchp->i2 + xchp->chg2 <= s2) >>> 0bb313a5 225) xchp = xchp->next; >> >> Hmm, line 223 *is* exercised by t4015.85. > > This, along with Dscho's[1] review of an earlier coverage report, > makes one wonder if there is some off-by-one error in the reporting > logic, such that it is reporting the wrong lines as not covered. This is definitely possible. I'll see if I can locate the bug in my report-generation code. However, line 222 is here [1] while (xchp != xch && So if this is always false, then the rest of the while condition will not be tested, nor will the body (line 225: xchp = xchp->next;). If it's just an off-by-one error in either direction, then line 224 still is definitely not covered (which would imply that 225 is not covered, either). > Footnotes: > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1911262116100.31080@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > which, among other seeming anomalies pointed out by Dscho, showed a > closing brace '}' not covered by a test: > > > Johannes Schindelin 867bc1d2 rebase-merges: ... > > sequencer.c > > 867bc1d2 4539) } > > Not sure why this closing parenthesis isn't covered :-D That closing paren is the end of a for loop [2] that has an if (*) break; inside. The closing paren _could_ be uncovered if the "break;" is hit every time. So, these seem like reasonable lines to report as uncovered. However, I'll continue to look for a problem in my code as I would hate to cause readers to stress over an actually-covered line. Thanks, -Stolee [1] https://github.com/git/git/blob/e0522318ac56aeb88f14e72ba2db25912e9972de/xdiff/xemit.c#L223 [2] https://github.com/git/git/blob/083378cc35c4dbcc607e4cdd24a5fca440163d17/sequencer.c#L4539
