From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB66E7EF0D for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 20:33:11 +0100 (CET) IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:I1O2Ah12Mrjbzr5DsmDT+DRfVm0co7zxezQtwd8ZsegeLfad9pjvdHbS+e9qxAeQG96LtLQf0aGP6fqocFdDyKjCmUhKSIZLWR4BhJdetC0bK+nBN3fGKuX3ZTcxBsVIWQwt1Xi6NU9IBJS2PAWK8TWM5DIfUi/yKRBybrysXNWC0ILsjavrocebSj4LrQT+SIs6FA+xowTVu5teqqpZAYF19CH0pGBVcf9d32JiKAHbtR/94sCt4MwrqHwI6LoJvvRNWqTifqk+UacQTHF/azh0t4XXskzsRAGV53YYGl4dkhdSDhKNuB7zVI3wvy+8reF91TOXJ+X5SLk1XXKp6KI9GzHyjyJSHjgl92efoMV7jKNd6EaooQB4xYTda4GUMtJvd6PaepURQm8XDZUZbDBIHo7pN9hHNOEGJ+sN6tCl/1Y= Authentication-Results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=antonbachin@yahoo.com; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=antonbachin@yahoo.com; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@nm12-vm6.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of antonbachin@yahoo.com) identity=pra; client-ip=98.138.91.105; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="antonbachin@yahoo.com"; x-sender="antonbachin@yahoo.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of antonbachin@yahoo.com designates 98.138.91.105 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=98.138.91.105; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="antonbachin@yahoo.com"; x-sender="antonbachin@yahoo.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@nm12-vm6.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com) identity=helo; client-ip=98.138.91.105; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="antonbachin@yahoo.com"; x-sender="postmaster@nm12-vm6.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AaAQDrj7tWmGlbimJegi6BXm0QiEyhDIVEgyKJJhcBC4UgSgKBOTsRAQEBAQEBAQEQAQEBAQEGCwsJIS6CLYIUAQEBAwFAARQkAQQLBgUYJwchJAERBhMJCwaHawEDCggOs1uCV4UMASMnAwqERAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQ8GDAIBhgOBbQiCQoI3ggYightLGIEPBYdThkiEU4QKhUyCbIMmA4FwGYFDSoN5gwMghTJEhSuBD4dBDyeCIh6Bb0sBiFIBAQE X-IPAS-Result: A0AaAQDrj7tWmGlbimJegi6BXm0QiEyhDIVEgyKJJhcBC4UgSgKBOTsRAQEBAQEBAQEQAQEBAQEGCwsJIS6CLYIUAQEBAwFAARQkAQQLBgUYJwchJAERBhMJCwaHawEDCggOs1uCV4UMASMnAwqERAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQ8GDAIBhgOBbQiCQoI3ggYightLGIEPBYdThkiEU4QKhUyCbIMmA4FwGYFDSoN5gwMghTJEhSuBD4dBDyeCIh6Bb0sBiFIBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,426,1449529200"; d="scan'208,217";a="164243342" Received: from nm12-vm6.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([98.138.91.105]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-GCM-SHA256; 10 Feb 2016 20:33:09 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1455132787; bh=OkFdSFmdvjJJ7BbTuLTAasucDSn0EzclMx6Mm3ydgZs=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From:Subject; b=DwKCJjqSn41YAo0bU7hW5v5+z9fsgan74Mfi907/oDC/lgcUUzIwEYWeIJQP9JRDTIIjMh/GfEKD6Hn2cZd4/ugJ3tjw2xQnaNBBFFJMRlIukvPtBYq9pAvqAcp6wL+PFuxiZ9ZT85/BlauIiINJhf6jTe9sbMee/SFWT4D3MYyTktLbEE7Cx1ZnMEVvGkedwijcZjWWOBvsi+0W35H4GjnXLzvoove4Yu1Hl9verwhP4+vGST5CwYZM9DYqWG9VslDeRwDgFE5183VEz3pUmsYVq5d+EVSyFXKzGvnc+AsfjCjkQzEjHTKMfeoyhLnZkbaHcGmJYOQDXl9m31Uohw== Received: from [98.138.226.180] by nm12.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Feb 2016 19:33:07 -0000 Received: from [98.138.84.38] by tm15.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Feb 2016 19:33:07 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Feb 2016 19:33:07 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 749009.46576.bm@smtp106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: b0K8FbUVM1nCVnOUYouLccLN9ct2oyuwxpyn5oKZIm2f6aF .irELvU65.M5wuZVEUSptR6p1cs3mLlYQBDHt9yJYi.UENTO.lbV3_Qc58kq rbvRL5qOzel3DQrL0_JTkj5AO2DTw7cppDIR7j20GPjSv48NvhD7rXs9QVta 8zLARqDMxCkLBp1ZshODlGH6rwEYvDA.c_b92PmoHenFxguKNkMWwGT2XUQ3 WYGMpL.qV93AuEYo_Dz7B91WkCE9CGjxqUwL6lX9ECS4ebpHqFmhdfMk.iWR qbXcaVNKdlZGbrkYm9jMJoCTaItTv2mTp2XC9x4BR7Py3JFOLJqcirI2nAE1 gyH3tlhSb1PHpKiq3oejeI7l6krVB_ty8Uof9RguMQGqC3KbU7L6baZTITM5 uKf2KGckC1KR.52y3s7VnUJsEVPI2kqklVoVXb7gHbyPUfQX.36a_h38tSHB WVEISNggh._4EvKaRFd8Knr0GHj44RmioA.bSpiFQ0j2XCRbDwoSIwRe3Yer D0StZQQEdxfARd_v6fWC_vA17NaVGPyU9jt_K8Roc8Ydid925Ew-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: ddtAESaswBBsjSthz_dVP91gr2NDfymF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_774F1DE8-57F7-4DD0-AE85-2400E7758C0C" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\)) From: Anton Bachin In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:33:06 -0600 Cc: Gerd Stolpmann , caml users X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 476825586.41697-00afb6f4852b0d8b7650d2797fc749cc Message-Id: <16829156-57F5-4517-8263-A367BB552732@yahoo.com> References: <1FE0ECD4-BBD6-48DA-95BD-BB240E07484C@yahoo.com> <1455130851.23513.140.camel@e130.lan.sumadev.de> To: Gabriel Scherer X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] =?UTF-8?Q?=5BANN=5D_Bisect=5Fppx_1=2E0=2E0_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=93_Modernized_code_coverage_for_OCaml?= --Apple-Mail=_774F1DE8-57F7-4DD0-AE85-2400E7758C0C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Assuming this is what Gerd is indeed looking for, I can confirm that Bisect= _ppx still supports it. See https://github.com/rleonid/bisect_ppx/blob/master/doc/advanced.md#unreachab= le-code We preferred to document only BISECT_VISIT (which does the same thing), in = order to have only option. But both Bisect_ppx and Bisect support BISECT_MARK and BISECT_VISIT. > On Feb 10, 2016, at 13:23, Gabriel Scherer wr= ote: >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Gerd Stolpmann > wrote: > That's interesting news. In my last job I used (the old) bisect > frequently. >=20 > What I really would love to see is negative coverage: Mark code sections > where you expect that they are never executed. That could be a simple > "assert false" but also more extensive error handling. Ideally, the tool > would automatically recognize certain patterns. >=20 > The old bisect supports special (*BISECT-MARK*) comment to mark dead code= for this reason. Do you have something else in mind? >=20=20 > That's especially useful when you have a management that is after high > coverage numbers... >=20 > Gerd >=20 >=20 > Am Mittwoch, den 10.02.2016, 09:33 -0600 schrieb Anton Bachin: > > Hello, > > > > We would like to announce the release of Bisect_ppx 1.0.0, a code cover= age tool > > for OCaml with appealing reports: > > > > https://github.com/rleonid/bisect_ppx > > > > > > You can see a live coverage report here: > > > > http://rleonid.github.io/bisect_ppx/coverage/ > > > > Reports can also be submitted to Coveralls.io using ocveralls [1]. See = an > > example here [2]. > > > > > > Bisect_ppx is a fork of the original Bisect by Xavier Clerc, with exten= sive > > further development. Differences from Bisect, and from earlier versions= of > > Bisect_ppx, include: > > > > - the nicer and more legible HTML reports, > > - more thorough instrumentation, now including nested functions and or-= patterns, > > - improved compatibility with other PPX rewriters, > > - an Ocamlbuild plugin, > > - many bugfixes, and > > - usage, performance, and documentation improvements. > > > > > > Bisect_ppx was originally forked to update and maintain Bisect's PPX mo= de, with > > the OCaml community moving to PPX. Bisect_ppx does not have Bisect's Ca= mlp4 > > dependency. We do not believe that the original Bisect is being actively > > maintained. > > > > > > Regards, > > Anton & Leonid > > > > > > P.S. If you are working on a project that uses Bisect_ppx, please let u= s know! > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/sagotch/ocveralls > > [2]: https://coveralls.io/builds/4913198/source?filename=3Dsrc%2Fsyntax= %2FinstrumentPpx.ml > > > > >=20 > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Gerd Stolpmann, Darmstadt, Germany gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de > My OCaml site: http://www.camlcity.org > Contact details: http://www.camlcity.org/contact.html > Company homepage: http://www.gerd-stolpmann.de > ------------------------------------------------------------ >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_774F1DE8-57F7-4DD0-AE85-2400E7758C0C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Assuming this is what Gerd is indeed looking for, I can co= nfirm that Bisect_ppx
still supports it. See

https://github.com/rleonid/bisect_ppx/blob/master/doc/advanced.m= d#unreachable-code

We preferred to document only BISECT_VISIT (which doe= s the same thing), in order
to have only option. But b= oth Bisect_ppx and Bisect support BISECT_MARK and
BISE= CT_VISIT.

On Feb 10, 2016, at 13:23, Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com<= /a>> wrote:



On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Gerd= Stolpmann <info@gerd-stolpmann.de> wrote:
That's interesting n= ews. In my last job I used (the old) bisect
frequently.

What I really would love to see is negative coverage: Mark code sections where you expect that they are never executed. That could be a simple
"assert false" but also more extensive error handling. Ideally, the tool would automatically recognize certain patterns.
=

The old bisect support= s special (*BISECT-MARK*) comment to mark dead code for this reason. Do you= have something else in mind?
 
That's especially useful when you have a management that is after high
coverage numbers...

Gerd


Am Mittwoch, den 10.02.2016, 09:33 -0600 schrieb Anton Bachin:
> Hello,
>
> We would like to announce the release of Bisect_ppx 1.0.0, a code cove= rage tool
> for OCaml with appealing reports:
>
>   https://github.com/rleonid/bisect_p= px
>
>
> You can see a live coverage report here:
>
>   http://rleonid.github.io/bi= sect_ppx/coverage/
>
> Reports can also be submitted to Coveralls.io using ocveralls [= 1]. See an
> example here [2].
>
>
> Bisect_ppx is a fork of the original Bisect by Xavier Clerc, with exte= nsive
> further development. Differences from Bisect, and from earlier version= s of
> Bisect_ppx, include:
>
> - the nicer and more legible HTML reports,
> - more thorough instrumentation, now including nested functions and or= -patterns,
> - improved compatibility with other PPX rewriters,
> - an Ocamlbuild plugin,
> - many bugfixes, and
> - usage, performance, and documentation improvements.
>
>
> Bisect_ppx was originally forked to update and maintain Bisect's PPX m= ode, with
> the OCaml community moving to PPX. Bisect_ppx does not have Bisect's C= amlp4
> dependency. We do not believe that the original Bisect is being active= ly
> maintained.
>
>
> Regards,
> Anton & Leonid
>
>
> P.S. If you are working on a project that uses Bisect_ppx, please let = us know!
>
>
> [1]: https://github.com/sagotch/ocveralls > [2]: https://coveralls.io/builds/4913198/source?filename=3Dsrc%2Fsyntax%2F= instrumentPpx.ml
>
>

--
------------------------------------------------------------
Gerd Stolpmann, Darmstadt, Germany    gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de
My OCaml site:          http://www.camlc= ity.org
Contact details:        http://ww= w.camlcity.org/contact.html
Company homepage:       http://www.gerd-= stolpmann.de
------------------------------------------------------------



= --Apple-Mail=_774F1DE8-57F7-4DD0-AE85-2400E7758C0C--