Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!goanna!ok
From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel
Subject: Re: Whose debugger is better, Eiffel or Objective C?
Keywords: viewer debuggers eiffel
Message-ID: <4848@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 28 Feb 91 02:39:35 GMT
References: <1991Feb26.045704.11186@ecst.csuchico.edu> <1991Feb26.153112.24437@bony1.bony.com>
Followup-To: comp.lang.eiffel
Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 13

In article <1991Feb26.153112.24437@bony1.bony.com>, richieb@bony1.bony.com (Richard Bielak) writes:
> Here is a wild suggestion for a future debugger. It would be nice if
> the debugger kept track of which routines were tested. This way you
> could get a report or a warning at system build time that would list
> the code that was never executed.

What's wild about it?  Some C systems provide a tool "tcov" (test coverage).
You get counts for each statement, and counts from several runs of a program
can be combined in one display.  SICStus Prolog provides similar counts, so
it is easy to check in a debugging session which rules haven't been tested
yet.  People were doing this for Fortran decades ago.
-- 
The purpose of advertising is to destroy the freedom of the market.