[seam-dev] Issues with testing and emma

[José Rodolfo Freitas]

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 at gmail.com> 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 at gmail.com> 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 at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>>
>>
>