rust/tests/coverage/nested_loops.cov-map

Function name: nested_loops::main
Raw bytes (164): 0x[01, 01, 14, 07, 47, 05, 11, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 3f, 05, 01, 09, 4b, 3f, 05, 15, 01, 09, 47, 4b, 01, 0d, 05, 15, 05, 01, 18, 01, 01, 01, 00, 0a, 01, 01, 09, 00, 10, 01, 00, 13, 00, 2e, 01, 01, 09, 00, 16, 01, 00, 19, 00, 1b, 05, 02, 13, 00, 20, 09, 01, 0d, 00, 12, 09, 00, 15, 00, 18, 09, 01, 0d, 00, 12, 09, 00, 15, 00, 18, 0d, 01, 12, 00, 17, 11, 01, 10, 00, 16, 02, 01, 11, 00, 16, 26, 01, 0d, 00, 0e, 26, 01, 0d, 00, 13, 26, 01, 0d, 00, 13, 26, 01, 10, 00, 16, 15, 01, 11, 00, 18, 15, 01, 14, 00, 1b, 2e, 01, 15, 00, 21, 36, 01, 18, 02, 12, 42, 03, 0d, 00, 0e, 4e, 02, 09, 00, 17, 01, 02, 01, 00, 02]
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => $DIR/nested_loops.rs
Number of expressions: 20
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Expression(1, Add), rhs = Expression(17, Add)
- expression 1 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(4)
- expression 2 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)
- expression 3 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)
- expression 4 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)
- expression 5 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)
- expression 6 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)
- expression 7 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)
- expression 8 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)
- expression 9 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)
- expression 10 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)
- expression 11 operands: lhs = Expression(15, Add), rhs = Counter(1)
- expression 12 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(2)
- expression 13 operands: lhs = Expression(18, Add), rhs = Expression(15, Add)
- expression 14 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(5)
- expression 15 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(2)
- expression 16 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Expression(18, Add)
- expression 17 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)
- expression 18 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(5)
- expression 19 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(0)
Number of file 0 mappings: 24
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 1) to (start + 0, 10)
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 16)
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 0, 19) to (start + 0, 46)
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 22)
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 0, 25) to (start + 0, 27)
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 2, 19) to (start + 0, 32)
- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 18)
- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 0, 21) to (start + 0, 24)
- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 18)
- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 0, 21) to (start + 0, 24)
- Code(Counter(3)) at (prev + 1, 18) to (start + 0, 23)
- Code(Counter(4)) at (prev + 1, 16) to (start + 0, 22)
- Code(Expression(0, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 17) to (start + 0, 22)
    = ((c1 + c4) - (c0 + c3))
- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 14)
    = ((c0 + c3) - c1)
- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
    = ((c0 + c3) - c1)
- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
    = ((c0 + c3) - c1)
- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 16) to (start + 0, 22)
    = ((c0 + c3) - c1)
- Code(Counter(5)) at (prev + 1, 17) to (start + 0, 24)
- Code(Counter(5)) at (prev + 1, 20) to (start + 0, 27)
- Code(Expression(11, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 21) to (start + 0, 33)
    = ((c0 + c2) - c1)
- Code(Expression(13, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 24) to (start + 2, 18)
    = ((c1 + c5) - (c0 + c2))
- Code(Expression(16, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 14)
    = ((c0 + c3) - (c1 + c5))
- Code(Expression(19, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 9) to (start + 0, 23)
    = (c1 - c0)
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 2, 1) to (start + 0, 2)
Highest counter ID seen: c5
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works. 2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00			`Function name: nested_loops::main`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			Raw bytes (164): 0x[01, 01, 14, 07, 47, 05, 11, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 47, 05, 01, 0d, 3f, 05, 01, 09, 4b, 3f, 05, 15, 01, 09, 47, 4b, 01, 0d, 05, 15, 05, 01, 18, 01, 01, 01, 00, 0a, 01, 01, 09, 00, 10, 01, 00, 13, 00, 2e, 01, 01, 09, 00, 16, 01, 00, 19, 00, 1b, 05, 02, 13, 00, 20, 09, 01, 0d, 00, 12, 09, 00, 15, 00, 18, 09, 01, 0d, 00, 12, 09, 00, 15, 00, 18, 0d, 01, 12, 00, 17, 11, 01, 10, 00, 16, 02, 01, 11, 00, 16, 26, 01, 0d, 00, 0e, 26, 01, 0d, 00, 13, 26, 01, 0d, 00, 13, 26, 01, 10, 00, 16, 15, 01, 11, 00, 18, 15, 01, 14, 00, 1b, 2e, 01, 15, 00, 21, 36, 01, 18, 02, 12, 42, 03, 0d, 00, 0e, 4e, 02, 09, 00, 17, 01, 02, 01, 00, 02]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works. 2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00			`Number of files: 1`
coverage-dump: Dump filenames instead of global file IDs (and bless) 2025-04-24 07:36:50 +00:00			`- file 0 => $DIR/nested_loops.rs`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`Number of expressions: 20`
			`- expression 0 operands: lhs = Expression(1, Add), rhs = Expression(17, Add)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`- expression 1 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(4)`
			`- expression 2 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`- expression 3 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`- expression 4 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`- expression 5 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)`
			`- expression 6 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)`
			`- expression 7 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)`
			`- expression 8 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)`
			`- expression 9 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Counter(1)`
			`- expression 10 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)`
			`- expression 11 operands: lhs = Expression(15, Add), rhs = Counter(1)`
			`- expression 12 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(2)`
			`- expression 13 operands: lhs = Expression(18, Add), rhs = Expression(15, Add)`
			`- expression 14 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(5)`
			`- expression 15 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(2)`
			`- expression 16 operands: lhs = Expression(17, Add), rhs = Expression(18, Add)`
			`- expression 17 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(3)`
			`- expression 18 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(5)`
			`- expression 19 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(0)`
			`Number of file 0 mappings: 24`
			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 1) to (start + 0, 10)`
			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 16)`
			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 0, 19) to (start + 0, 46)`
			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 22)`
			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 0, 25) to (start + 0, 27)`
			`- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 2, 19) to (start + 0, 32)`
			`- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 18)`
			`- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 0, 21) to (start + 0, 24)`
			`- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 18)`
			`- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 0, 21) to (start + 0, 24)`
			`- Code(Counter(3)) at (prev + 1, 18) to (start + 0, 23)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`- Code(Counter(4)) at (prev + 1, 16) to (start + 0, 22)`
			`- Code(Expression(0, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 17) to (start + 0, 22)`
			`= ((c1 + c4) - (c0 + c3))`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 14)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`= ((c0 + c3) - c1)`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 19)`
			`= ((c0 + c3) - c1)`
			`- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 19)`
			`= ((c0 + c3) - c1)`
			`- Code(Expression(9, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 16) to (start + 0, 22)`
			`= ((c0 + c3) - c1)`
			`- Code(Counter(5)) at (prev + 1, 17) to (start + 0, 24)`
			`- Code(Counter(5)) at (prev + 1, 20) to (start + 0, 27)`
			`- Code(Expression(11, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 21) to (start + 0, 33)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`= ((c0 + c2) - c1)`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`- Code(Expression(13, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 24) to (start + 2, 18)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`= ((c1 + c5) - (c0 + c2))`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`- Code(Expression(16, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 14)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`= ((c0 + c3) - (c1 + c5))`
coverage: Only merge adjacent coverage spans This also removes some manipulation of the function signature span that only made sense in the context of merging non-adjacent spans. 2025-04-12 07:52:55 +00:00			`- Code(Expression(19, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 9) to (start + 0, 23)`
coverage: Completely overhaul counter assignment, using node-flow graphs 2025-01-12 10:36:07 +00:00			`= (c1 - c0)`
			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 2, 1) to (start + 0, 2)`
			`Highest counter ID seen: c5`
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works. 2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00