Comments on: Walk-Through Test Coverage http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2008/10/walk-through-test-coverage/ Running commentary about agile development, user experience design and Ajax. Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:33:43 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Dan Kubb http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2008/10/walk-through-test-coverage/comment-page-1/#comment-8145 Dan Kubb Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:18:41 +0000 http://www.pathf.com/blogs/?p=1202#comment-8145 One approach that I've begun testing recently is to organize my unit specs using the rubyspec style, so one spec per public method. I then have a rake task that runs the single spec against it's related method using heckle. Heckle will mutate the method in various ways and re-run the spec each time to ensure each individual behaviour is covered properly. This allows me to eliminate incidental coverage, since only the spec related to that method is being run. It also always results in 100% coverage as reported by rcov. One approach that I’ve begun testing recently is to organize my unit specs using the rubyspec style, so one spec per public method. I then have a rake task that runs the single spec against it’s related method using heckle. Heckle will mutate the method in various ways and re-run the spec each time to ensure each individual behaviour is covered properly.

This allows me to eliminate incidental coverage, since only the spec related to that method is being run. It also always results in 100% coverage as reported by rcov.

]]>