Re: [seam-dev] Issues with testing and emma

ops, sorry, I hate typing with gloves. continuing... I believe that the best approach in our case (using arquillian) would be jacoco which uses on the fly bytecode instrumentation. On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 11:16 AM, José Rodolfo Freitas <joserodolfo.freitas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Hi john, aslak provided us an extension to integrate arquillian with jacoco. > > https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-extension-jacoco > > we´ve been testing it and it´s working well. > > Emma uses offline bytecode instrumentation, and this could be a really > hellish to analyzes coverage data over the container. > > I believe that the best approach in our case (using arquillian) would be > > > On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:19 AM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> I just noticed this morning that emma reports very low code coverage on my >> code. However, when I switch the injection points from say "SomeBean" to >> "SomeBeanImpl" then my code coverage sudden jumps up. I expect it to be >> higher. It seems like Emma has some issues dealing with CDI proxies, or >> possibly arquillian. Has anyone else noticed this? >> >> John >> >> _______________________________________________ >> seam-dev mailing list >> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev >> >> > _______________________________________________ seam-dev mailing list seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev