|Ned Batchelder : Blog | Code | Text | Site|
» Home : Blog : December 2004
I've been hacking on code this weekend, and I've managed to get myself stuck. I started using Gareth Rees' coverage.py to measure the code coverage of some unit tests. It works well, but counts docstrings as missed lines of code. I have a lot of docstrings, so the results were too noisy to be useful. I wanted to fix it so that it understood docstrings for what they were. I also wanted to add some other features, for example, the ability to mark lines of code as not expected to be run, so that they would not be counted as missed lines.
So I dug into the code. It works by using the debugging trace hook to record which lines of code are executed, and parsing the source of the modules to understand which lines are executable. I decided to switch it from the parser module to the compiler module for the parsing half of the job. The parser module returns a low-level, grammar-centric representation of the source text, making it difficult to distinguish a docstring from any other expression statement. The compiler module is higher-level, returning a tree of nodes that corresponds more to the semantics of the program. It seemed like a no-brainer, and it all went very well.
Then I wanted to add another feature, so that an entire suite of statements (the Python equivalent of a block in other languages) could be marked as "not expected to be run". For example, if a module has a chunk of code at the end to allow it to be run from the command line, it would be nice if the entire suite could be marked without having to put a marker comment on every line. So a single marker could do it like this:
And if we're going to do that, then it should work uniformly for all suites:
And there's the problem: the compiler module completely discards any trace of the else. It has both suites of code, but the actual line with the "else:" on it isn't represented in the parse tree at all. So it's impossible to match up line-oriented regular expression results (finding the markers) with the parse tree results (what code does it apply to?).
So I'm pondering my options. Go back to the old parse technique, and hack up something to exclude docstrings? Disallow excluding "else" suites? Do something else completely? It had all been going so well. Sigh.