From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski <me@komzpa.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Better testing coverage and unified coding for plpgsql loops
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 10:46:23 -0300
Message-ID: <20180102134623.4mhrbnc2im6bfp7a@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAC8Q8t+nY_O+-KAvHao2T9Fj7rw1hVeSNNALERHyhvpTMgafgg@mail.gmail.com>
Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:
> - how do currently existing coverage tools display coverage for such a
> large macro?
>
> I expect DEFINE's to be treated as comments.
It is, but then it is counted in the callsite where each branch is
displayed separately. So in
https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c.gcov.html
line 2028 you can see a bunch of "+" and three "-".
> - can this macro become a function?
The "exit_action" argument makes it tough. It can probably be done --
it seems to require contorting the one callsite that uses "goto" though.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, me@komzpa.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Better testing coverage and unified coding for plpgsql loops
In-Reply-To: <20180102134623.4mhrbnc2im6bfp7a@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox