Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

rjbs (4671)

  (email not shown publicly)
AOL IM: RicardoJBSignes (Add Buddy, Send Message)
Yahoo! ID: RicardoSignes (Add User, Send Message)

I'm a Perl coder living in Bethlehem, PA and working Philadelphia. I'm a philosopher and theologan by training, but I was shocked to learn upon my graduation that these skills don't have many associated careers. Now I write code.

Journal of rjbs (4671)

Thursday January 26, 2006
11:42 PM

all hail tom

[ #28487 ]

Today, I got an email from Tom, my replacement at IQE. He'd found himself needing a new kind of tolerance for Number::Tolerant. I originally wrote Number::Tolerant for IQE's characterization system, and I really enjoyed working on it. Once I left, though, I didn't have much reason to work on it.

So, today Tom sent me that email, and included the code for the new kind of tolerance. It's basically a plus-or-minus offset, but the target value is not the midpoint of the extremes.

I integrated his code (tweaking just a bit), and wrote tests. After writing tests for offset, I ran coverage and found that it was nowhere near the 100% coverage I remebered. I reorganized a bunch of my tests, wrote about 150 more tests, found a few little bugs, and fell back in love with this obscure, weird little distribution.

I can clearly see how it needs to be refactored, now, and I may just do that soon.

Potentially best of all, I believe I've found a bug in Devel::Cover. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe Paul will decide that the condition required to make the bug appear is not worth addressing. If not, though, we will have identified a new bug in one of the most useful Perl programming tools, all because some engineers at IQE demand weird product specifications!

Tom at IQE, I salute you!

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Being very interested in Devel::Cover and having reported a bug myself - I just checked it's queue [] on [].

    So what is the bug and have you reported it?

    • I've reported the bug to PJ and given him a test case.

      Basically, if you define the same package in two files, and each definition of the package has the same sub(s), once you load the second version of the package, coverage of the first package will not be recorded. It will be dropped during coverage analysis as an "extra branch."

      I solved this temporarily by reordering my tests, and then by refactoring so that I did not use the same namespace twice. The bug is still there in D::C, though.