rust/tests/coverage/while.cov-map

Function name: while::main
Raw bytes (26): 0x[01, 01, 01, 01, 00, 04, 01, 01, 01, 01, 10, 03, 02, 0b, 00, 14, 00, 00, 15, 02, 06, 01, 03, 01, 00, 02]
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 1
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Zero
Number of file 0 mappings: 4
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 1) to (start + 1, 16)
- Code(Expression(0, Add)) at (prev + 2, 11) to (start + 0, 20)
    = (c0 + Zero)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 0, 21) to (start + 2, 6)
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 3, 1) to (start + 0, 2)
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: while::main`
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions. 2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00			`Raw bytes (26): 0x[01, 01, 01, 01, 00, 04, 01, 01, 01, 01, 10, 03, 02, 0b, 00, 14, 00, 00, 15, 02, 06, 01, 03, 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`
			`- file 0 => global file 1`
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions. 2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00			`Number of expressions: 1`
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings 2023-10-24 11:48:59 +00:00			`- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Zero`
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 file 0 mappings: 4`
			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 1) to (start + 1, 16)`
			`- Code(Expression(0, Add)) at (prev + 2, 11) to (start + 0, 20)`
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings 2023-10-24 11:48:59 +00:00			`= (c0 + Zero)`
coverage: Tweak individual tests to be unaffected by `rustfmt` Some of these tests use non-standard formatting that we can simulate by strategically adding `//` line comments. One contains `where` clauses that would be split across multiple lines, which we can keep on one line by moving the bounds to the generic type instead. 2024-01-16 03:12:10 +00:00			`- Code(Zero) at (prev + 0, 21) to (start + 2, 6)`
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions. 2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00			`- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 3, 1) to (start + 0, 2)`
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