From: Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com>
To: Vincent Jacques <vincent@vincent-jacques.net>
Cc: caml users <caml-list@inria.fr>,
Francois Pottier <francois.pottier@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Test coverage of generated lexers/parsers
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 17:53:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPFanBF1pNXw9-BAOzwB2ZnDZ=rGSf3z+0YK3HfSxX+EhgZgYw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEnGa7CztvqAk3NdGmit697hcpjc2eJiy2N9piLxb0AyZ_KciQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3403 bytes --]
This is an interesting question and, as far as I know, there is no good
solution using existing versions of the interacting tools.
Below very simple patch that will add (*BISECT-IGNORE*) in front of every
line of code generated by Menhir, except those written by the programmer
(the "strecthes" in Menhir-speak). It applies cleanly on top of the latest
released Menhir archive,
http://gallium.inria.fr/~fpottier/menhir/menhir-20160303.tar.gz
The patch as-is is obviously a hack: it would need to be a configuration
option when running menhir, and hard-coding Bisect (or bisect_ppx)'s syntax
into Menhir is not elegant. One could try to have a configuration option to
let users write a fixed string (or comment) at the beginning of each
generated code line, but I'm not sure whether François Pottier (in cc:)
would consider this is elegant enough. François, would you comment on
whether this is a direction that seems acceptable to you?
(Bisect support ignoring entire regions at once by using
(*BISECT-IGNORE-BEGIN*) and (*BISECT-IGNORE-END*); we could try to
implement that instead of a per-line change, but I suspect that it would be
slightly harder to implement (you have to hook the beginning of input, end
of input, and around each user-code insertion) for no real gain.)
Toggling code-coverage semantics by inserting comments is not a very nice
interface (although rather logical when you think of the level of
generality required), so it's a bit frustrating that parser generators
would have to play at this level. It would be better to have a more
structured, unified interface supported by all the code-coverage tools, but
to my knowledge no such thing exists.
From d595ba5149a314c56623e1735af7678f5f62d525 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 17:43:14 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] output (*BISECT-IGNORE*) in front of each
non-programmer-written line
EXPERIMENTAL PATCH: this should of course be turned into an explicit option
---
src/printer.ml | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/printer.ml b/src/printer.ml
index ea978bc..714bb08 100644
--- a/src/printer.ml
+++ b/src/printer.ml
@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ let rawnl f =
let nl f =
rawnl f;
+ output_string f "(*BISECT-IGNORE*)";
output_substring f whitespace 0 !indentation
let indent ofs producer f x =
--
2.5.0
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Vincent Jacques <vincent@vincent-jacques.net
> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Does somebody have experience measuring test coverage of generated
> lexers/parsers?
>
> I'm using ocamllex/ocamlyacc [1] (but I can switch to Menhir [2]) to
> generate a lexer/parser. In my tests, I simply check that some input
> strings give the ASTs I expect.
>
> I usually use Bisect [3] to make sure that my tests cover the code I
> intended to cover, but in that configuration, Bisect is lost between the
> .mll/.mly files and the generated .ml files and produces useless reports.
>
> How would you measure test coverage in that case?
>
> Thanks,
>
> [1] http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/lexyacc.html
> [2] http://gallium.inria.fr/~fpottier/menhir/
> [3] http://bisect.x9c.fr/
> --
> Vincent Jacques
> http://vincent-jacques.net
>
> "S'il n'y a pas de solution, c'est qu'il n'y a pas de problème"
> Devise Shadock
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4617 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-output-BISECT-IGNORE-in-front-of-each-non-programmer.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 689 bytes --]
From d595ba5149a314c56623e1735af7678f5f62d525 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 17:43:14 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] output (*BISECT-IGNORE*) in front of each
non-programmer-written line
EXPERIMENTAL PATCH: this should of course be turned into an explicit option
---
src/printer.ml | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/printer.ml b/src/printer.ml
index ea978bc..714bb08 100644
--- a/src/printer.ml
+++ b/src/printer.ml
@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ let rawnl f =
let nl f =
rawnl f;
+ output_string f "(*BISECT-IGNORE*)";
output_substring f whitespace 0 !indentation
let indent ofs producer f x =
--
2.5.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-06 22:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-06 19:53 Vincent Jacques
2016-03-06 22:53 ` Gabriel Scherer [this message]
2016-03-06 22:59 ` Anton Bachin
2016-03-07 8:20 ` Vincent Jacques
2016-03-08 12:43 ` François Pottier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAPFanBF1pNXw9-BAOzwB2ZnDZ=rGSf3z+0YK3HfSxX+EhgZgYw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=gabriel.scherer@gmail.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=francois.pottier@inria.fr \
--cc=vincent@vincent-jacques.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox