Source for 0.90

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Pete Smith

unread,
May 13, 2010, 5:05:36 AM5/13/10
to Flexcover Discussion Group
Hi all.

I've been using FlexCover for a while now (few weeks anyway!) with the
Flex 4 SDK modifications. I'm really pleased to see a formal release.
The current version I've got has integrated quite nicely into our CI
system, just so long as you put a delay test as the last test in your
flex unit tests, which allows the Coverage Viewer time to finish
logging the data.

I was just wondering if the SVN repository was going to be updated
with the new source code?

I've checked out the current trunk, but I can't get it to build due to
a missing build file.

I've made some mods to the 0.80 (the latest version in SVN), to allow
me to ignore certain classes which either don't want to be in the
coverage as they're the test classes, or are effectively untestable,
and I don't want their poor results stinking up my otherwise great
coverage (I know, I know!).

I'd like to get these changes integrated with the latest version.

Thanks.

Pete.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Flexcover Discussion Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to flexcover-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to flexcover-discus...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/flexcover-discussion?hl=en.

Brian Thomas

unread,
May 14, 2010, 12:56:07 PM5/14/10
to Flexcover Discussion Group
Hey Pete,

Thanks for bringing this up. The SVN repository will absolutely be
updated with the source for the new Flex 4 compiler patch. I'll work
on getting the patched files organized and checked in!

Regards,
Brian

Vince

unread,
Jun 23, 2010, 3:52:57 PM6/23/10
to Flexcover Discussion Group
I tried to retrieve the zip file on the bottom of the google group but
the file is no longer available. Having the source available would be
helpful. We are having some fundamental problems with flexcover
correctly instrumenting our code. It leaves out any class not hit by
a unit test. Isn't the point of a coverage report to help us
determine what classes don't have unit tests against them.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages