Chet, thanks for the tip about where to find the tests for subst.c . i still think that my tests cover some cases that aren't covered by posixexp.tests .
it's cool that you increased the coverage of subst.c . how did you produce the report? i didn't see a script or makefile target to do it. On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu> wrote: > On 3/9/18 3:14 AM, don fong wrote: > > > > > my question was whether you have tests for the variable modifiers. > > i don't see any. that's the area of code i was touching, and that's why > i > > wrote a few tests of that area. > > Thank you for the inspiration. I ran the devel version of the test suite > through gcov, added some tests, and was able to increase the coverage of > subst.c (the word expansion code, plus) from 83% to 86%. It's tough to get > it higher than that due to the functions that exist only for readline > support and the debugging and system call error-handling code. > > Chet > -- > ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer > ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates > Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU c...@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/ >
