Re^2: TDD with Coverage Analysis. Wow.

Perhaps you could test the non $^S branch by embedding the code under test in a separate litttle script and arrange to have this code executed in a separate process executed using an IPC::Run::<something> call and/or system(). You could then capture any error output/exit code as needed to verify correct behavior?

--DrWhy

"If God had meant for us to think for ourselves he would have given us brains. Oh, wait..."

Comment on Re^2: TDD with Coverage Analysis. Wow.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: TDD with Coverage Analysis. Wow. by tlm (Prior) on Aug 30, 2005 at 09:18 UTC
Perhaps you could test the non $^S branch by embedding the code under test in a separate litttle script and arrange to have this code executed in a separate process executed using an IPC::Run::<something> call and/or system(). You could then capture any error output/exit code as needed to verify correct behavior? Yes, I did try something like this, and it worked, but Devel::Cover did not detect it. So the branch is not really uncoverable, I originally wrote, but rather "uncoverable as far as Devel::Cover can tell." :-) the lowliest monk	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: TDD with Coverage Analysis. Wow.
by tlm (Prior) on Aug 30, 2005 at 09:18 UTC

Perhaps you could test the non $^S branch by embedding the code under test in a separate litttle script and arrange to have this code executed in a separate process executed using an IPC::Run::<something> call and/or system(). You could then capture any error output/exit code as needed to verify correct behavior?

Yes, I did try something like this, and it worked, but Devel::Cover did not detect it. So the branch is not really uncoverable, I originally wrote, but rather "uncoverable as far as Devel::Cover can tell." :-)

the lowliest monk

[reply]