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

undo the previous hack, and now avoid putting coverage points around all non-phase-0 expressions

Browse Source 
svn: r12444
This commit is contained in:
Eli Barzilay 2008-11-14 08:01:43 +00:00
parent 8e1dc82973
commit 984e6d7e2a
1 changed files with 7 additions and 27 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

34
collects/errortrace/stacktrace.ss
View File

@ -80,18 +80,12 @@
;; 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)
(define (test-coverage-point body expr phase)
(if (and (test-coverage-enabled) (zero? phase))
(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]
@ -407,33 +401,18 @@
[(#%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 _)
;; 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)]
expr]
;; Wrap body, also a profile point
[(#%plain-lambda args . body)
@ -554,7 +533,8 @@
(error 'errortrace "unrecognized expression form~a: ~e"
(if top? " at top-level" "")
(syntax->datum expr))])
expr)))
expr
phase)))
(define annotate (make-annotate #f #f))
(define annotate-top (make-annotate #t #f))