Re: Differential code coverage between 16 and HEAD

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Differential code coverage between 16 and HEAD
Date: 2024-04-15 23:53:48
Message-ID: 3e117f7388c26c11b05e642ed347ba533b456394.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 2024-04-14 at 15:33 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> - Coverage for some of the new unicode code is pretty poor:
>  
> https://anarazel.de/postgres/cov/16-vs-HEAD-2024-04-14/src/common/unicode_category.c.gcov.html#L122

Thank you for looking. Those functions are tested by category_test.c
which is run with the 'update-unicode' target.

Better testing in the SQL tests might be good, but the existing tests
are near-exhaustive, so I'm not terribly worried. Also, it's possible
not all of them are reachable by SQL, yet, because some of the later
patches in the series didn't land in 17.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2024-04-16 00:02:03 Re: pg17 issues with not-null contraints
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-04-15 23:42:38 Re: Time to back-patch libxml deprecation fixes?