Create jl_clear_coverage_data to dynamically reset coverage
#54358
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
vtjnash
approved these changes
May 4, 2024
fingolfin
approved these changes
May 24, 2024
DilumAluthge
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 3, 2024
There are some use-cases that would benefit from being able to reset the code coverage information during runtime. This creates the function `jl_clear_coverage_data` to reset the `coverageData` global.
staticfloat
added
backport 1.11
|
Tagging for backport to 1.10 and 1.11, as this is useful for the VSCode extension. If it's too much work to backport to 1.10, feel free to drop it, but if it's easy, might as well, so that LTS users get the new goodies. |
42 tasks
KristofferC
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 12, 2024
There are some use-cases that would benefit from being able to reset the code coverage information during runtime. This creates the function `jl_clear_coverage_data` to reset the `coverageData` global. (cherry picked from commit 018770d)
lazarusA
pushed a commit
to lazarusA/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 12, 2024
…ang#54358) There are some use-cases that would benefit from being able to reset the code coverage information during runtime. This creates the function `jl_clear_coverage_data` to reset the `coverageData` global.
46 tasks
No new goodies for LTS! |
KristofferC
removed
the
backport 1.10
KristofferC
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
Backported PRs: - [x] #54201 <!-- Fix generic triangular solves with empty matrices --> - [x] #54358 <!-- Create `jl_clear_coverage_data` to dynamically reset coverage --> - [x] #54908 <!-- LazyString in interpolated error messages in threadingconstructs --> - [x] #54952 <!-- LAPACK: Avoid repr call in `chkvalidparam` --> - [x] #54898 <!-- fix concurrent module loading return value --> - [x] #55082 <!-- Add fast method for copyto!(::Memory, ::Memory) --> - [x] #55084 <!-- Use triple quotes in TOML.print when string contains newline --> - [x] #55141 <!-- Update the aarch64 devdocs to reflect the current state of its support --> - [x] #54955 <!-- don't throw EOFError from sleep --> - [x] #54871 <!-- Make warn missed transformations pass optional --> - [x] #55178 <!-- Compat for `Base.@nospecializeinfer` --> - [x] #55197 <!-- compat notice for a[begin] indexing --> - [x] #54917 <!-- Fix potential underrun with annotation merging --> - [x] #55209 <!-- correction to compat notice for a[begin] --> - [x] #55203 <!-- document mutable struct const fields --> - [x] #54791 <!-- Bump libblastrampoline to v5.10.1 --> - [x] #54950 <!-- SuiteSparse: Bump version --> - [x] #54956 <!-- Fix accidental early evaluation of imported `using` binding --> - [x] #54996 <!-- inference: add missing `MustAlias` widening in `_getfield_tfunc` --> - [x] #55070 <!-- LinearAlgebra: LazyString in error messages for Diagonal/Bidiagonal --> - [x] #54574 <!-- Make ScopedValues public --> - [x] #54739 <!-- finish implementation of upgradable stdlibs --> - [x] #54965 <!-- RFC: Make `include_dependency(path; track_content=true)` the default --> - [x] #53286 <!-- Raise an error when using `include_dependency` with non-existent file or directory --> - [x] #55066 <!-- fix loading of repeated/concurrent modules --> - [x] #52694 <!-- Reinstate similar for AbstractQ for backward compatibility --> - [x] #55218 <!-- Artifacts: use a different way of getting the UUID of a module --> - [x] #54891 <!-- #54739-related fixes for loading stdlibs --> - [x] #55072 <!-- trace-compile: don't generate `precompile` statements for OpaqueClosure methods --> - [x] #55188 <!-- Make Core.TypeofUnion use the type method table --> Need manual backport: - [ ] #55052 <!-- Fix `(l/r)mul!` with `Diagonal`/`Bidiagonal` --> Contains multiple commits, manual intervention needed: Non-merged PRs with backport label: - [ ] #55169 <!-- `propertynames` for SVD respects private argument --> - [ ] #55148 <!-- Random: Mark unexported public symbols as public --> - [ ] #55017 <!-- TOML: Make `Dates` a type parameter --> - [ ] #55013 <!-- [docs] change docstring to match code --> - [ ] #54919 <!-- Fix annotated join with non-concrete eltype iters --> - [ ] #54457 <!-- Make `String(::Memory)` copy --> - [ ] #53957 <!-- tweak how filtering is done for what packages should be precompiled --> - [ ] #51479 <!-- prevent code loading from lookin in the versioned environment when building Julia --> - [ ] #50813 <!-- More doctests for Sockets and capitalization fix --> - [ ] #50157 <!-- improve docs for `@inbounds` and `Base.@propagate_inbounds` --> - [ ] #41244 <!-- Fix shell `cd` error when working dir has been deleted -->
KristofferC
removed
the
backport 1.11
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There are some use-cases that would benefit from being able to reset the code coverage information during runtime:
This creates the function
jl_clear_coverage_datato reset thecoverageDataglobal. I should be clear that I don't have a deep understanding of the coverage mechanism, so please review this change carefully.@IanButterworth what do you think? Also, who else would be good to review this?