does we have any code coverage tool for XSLT - xslt-2.0

any tools that can tell me what percentage of a XSL document get actually executed during tests?

Related

Getting the decision coverage HTML report with gcovr

I am using gcovr to generate the coverage analysis of some unit tests, and wanted to generate the HTML decision coverage report.
I am using Matlab, and am calling gcov and gcovr and generating the report following the instructions in the gcov 5.1 user's manual:
[status,report] = system([path_to_my_function,' & gcovr --gcov-executable gcov --decisions --html-details -o',name_of_my_html_report])
However, I am getting all the time an error saying that --decisions command is not defined for gcov. I have been trying different locations for the command, but didn't work, and looking on the Internet, but didn't find anything.
Does anybody have an idea of the possible error I may be doing?
Thank you!

Open Cover filters how to avoid test assembly files from code coverage

I have gone through the Opencover wiki documentation and tried a lot to figure out what would be the filter criteria for not to include test assembly as part of code coverage. Here is the problem
for eg I have many assemblies starts with sample name like sample.submodule.assembly1.dll, sample.submodule.assembly2.dll, my tests assembly also starts with sample like sample.submodule.tests.dll, here I applied the filter criteria for openCover
1.-filter: "+[sample*]* -[*tests]*"
it didn't work, not generating report file.
-filter: "+[sample*]* -[sample.submodule.tests]*" didn't work, not generating report file,
-filter: "+[sample*]* -[*]*tests*" didn't work, not generating report file too,
can somebody please advise what can be the filter criteria here to exclude all the test files from code coverage
First run OpenCover without any filters.
Now you can look at the XML report produced (or you can use ReportGenerator to turn it into HTML) and identify assemblies/modules that you wish to exclude.
now you can apply filters using the filter switch e.g.
-filter:"+[*]* -[*.tests]* -[*.Tests]*"
NOTE: no space between : and first "
or
"-filter:+[*]* -[*.tests]* -[*.Tests]*"
if you are talking about writing unit test using visual studio nunit adaptor then you have open cover UI visual studio extension available for all such purpose. it is wonderful.
Step 1) Install open cover from latest relese build https://github.com/opencover/opencover/releases
Step 2) Usuall it will install C:\Users\goma1940\AppData\Local\Apps\OpenCover (%localappdata%\Apps\OpenCover)
Steo 3) Install VS Extn from gallery https://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/6950a046-8919-4935-8542-c6f37956f688
Step 4) you have open cover test explorer and open cover coverage result pane as below…

Generating code coverage report using theIntern

I am using theIntern for unit testing my javascript framework. My test is running fine using node.
However, I am not able to generate code coverage report properly. I tried the options provided in the documentation. I was successful to print code coverage information on to the console while testing through selenium web driver. That gives only a summary.
How can I generate extensive code coverage report using reporters other than console?
I provided the "reporters" option but doesn't print the report. Any help would be appreciated.
The lcov reporter generates an lcov.info file that can then be passed to the lcov genhtml utility to output a complete set of HTML coverage reports (the simplest invocation is just genhtml lcov.info).
In Intern 1.2, however, there is a bug with the generated lcov.info files (fixed for Intern 1.3) that may cause genhtml to fail to find any coverage data inside a generated lcov.info file. The patch for this issue is very simple and you should be able to cleanly it to Intern 1.2 until the new version is released in the next couple of weeks.

VHDL test results into jUnit (or other Jenkins-recognized) format

I'm setting up automated regression testing for an FPGA project, almost exactly as described here:
Continuous integration of complex reconfigurable systems
Now I want to get test results (from VHDL REPORT statements in ModelSim simulation) to appear in Jenkins testing reports. My understanding is that Jenkins only natively supports jUnit format, and I looked for plugins supporting non-XML formats but didn't see any.
Generating valid XML from VHDL REPORT statements would be very difficult, since the simulation may immediately terminate depending on the severity. Which means that the closing tags would have to be duplicated in every single possible exit path for every single test -- not the most maintainable approach.
So, do you know of any straightforward way to convert plain text into jUnit (or another format, if supported by Jenkins)? If something doesn't already exist, is there an advantage to writing a Jenkins plugin vs just throwing together a perl script? Any other suggestions?
You should take a look at the XUnit Plugin. The Plugin reads test results from a number of tools, and seems adaptable to custom formats. From the documentation the plugin is able to read not only xml, but also csv and txt. For custom format you need to specify some style sheet for the transformation, I am not quite sure if this will go all the way for you. But even if it does not, I suppose the plugin should be easy to extend for your own format.
Old post but today there is a unit testing framework for VHDL that we've developed. It solves the problem by generating a report on the JUnit format. It also handles the case when the simulation stops due to a severe error. The tool is free and open source and can be found at https://github.com/LarsAsplund/vunit

Test code coverage without source code?

What tools are out there that can perform code coverage analysis at the machine code level rather than the source code level? I'm looking for a possible solution to perform fuzz testing on software that I do not have source code access.
I think the IBM Rational test coverage tools instrument object code.
Assuming you had such a tool, but no access to the source, what exactly
would code coverage mean, other than 100%?
If you didn't have 100% coverage, you'd know you hadn't exercised something.
But you would have no way of knowing what.
For compiled code (not Java), try Valgrind.
Old post... but my two cents.
If you have a bunch of jars and if you know what classes/methods you are using, you can instrument the jars with Emma and run your sample application against those jars.
In my case, I have jars which are actually proprietary components (to generate html code) which our company uses to build it's web-pages. We have a sample application that utilizes these components and a bunch of tests that are run against the sample app. I wrote an ant task to copy the maven dependencies to a directory, instrument them and run the tests against these instrumented jars. This task is invoked from the maven POM and is hence part of the build process.
Also, as part of the build process, we process the emma coverage data to produce a report. This report shows the classes and methods in the jar for which we do not have the source code! Hope this helps.
If you have the number of entry points (public methods), you can test the coverage for that. I don't know any tool for that though.
Otherwise you would have to test the assembly code coverage, and I don't know if it is possible.

Resources