suzanne.soy/racket
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

always mark coverage points around quote-syntax as covered (this is a hack, see HACK in the source)

Browse Source 
svn: r12443
This commit is contained in:
Eli Barzilay 2008-11-14 08:00:27 +00:00
parent 61d747dc96
commit 8e1dc82973
1 changed files with 24 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

27
collects/errortrace/stacktrace.ss
View File

@ -80,12 +80,18 @@
;; expressions with test suite coverage information. Returning the
;; first argument means no tests coverage information is collected.
(define no-coverage-point (gensym)) ; see HACK below
;; test-coverage-point : syntax syntax -> syntax
;; sets a test coverage point for a single expression
(define (test-coverage-point body expr)
(if (test-coverage-enabled)
(let ([key (gensym 'test-coverage-point)])
(initialize-test-coverage-point key expr)
;; see HACK below
(when (and (pair? body) (eq? no-coverage-point (car body)))
(set! body (cdr body))
(test-covered key))
(with-syntax ([key (datum->syntax
#f key (quote-syntax here))]
[body body]
@ -401,18 +407,33 @@
[(#%expression e)
top?
(certify expr #`(#%expression #,(annotate (syntax e) phase)))]
;; No way to wrap
[(#%require i ...) expr]
;; No error possible (and no way to wrap)
[(#%provide i ...) expr]
;; No error possible
[(quote _)
expr]
[(quote-syntax _)
expr]
;; HACK: if we get to a `quote-syntax', then this means that
;; there is some macro involved. Wrapping this `quote-syntax'
;; with a test-coverage-point is not going to do anything,
;; because the code that uses it has already been executed, when
;; the code was expanded for this annotation to take place. So a
;; cheap hack is to simply mark this specific point as covered,
;; whcih is what the following `no-coverage-point' tag signals
;; for `test-coverage-point' above. Note that the coverage point
;; will *still* be created and immediately faked as covered,
;; because if it's not created then there will be other
;; surrounding syntaxes that are still marked as uncovered. All
;; of this is not really a proper solution, because actual code
;; that happens at expansion time is not accounted for, but if
;; you use simple `syntax-rules' macros, then these
;; `quote-syntax' expressions are the only ones that will show up
;; as uncovered.
(cons no-coverage-point expr)]
;; Wrap body, also a profile point
[(#%plain-lambda args . body)