Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Language IDEs » C / C++ IDE (CDT) » Linux Tools with several executables?
Linux Tools with several executables? [message #989058] Tue, 04 December 2012 13:31
Magnus Andersson is currently offline Magnus Andersson
Messages: 1
Registered: December 2012
Junior Member
We have one Eclipse project for a huge C++ code base. We test the code with Google Test. For several reasons why build many (about 100) small unit test binaries and run them in parallel.

We want to show the total code coverage and all Valgrind errors, from all these 100 binaries, in Eclipse. Is there any easy way to accomplish this? (The gcov and valgrind Eclipse plugins in Linux Tools don't seem to fit our needs; the gcov plugin can open one of the 100 .gcda files and show its coverage, and the Valgrind plugin can profile one of the 100 binaries at a time.)

When we build and test the project, each Google Test binary produces a JUnit XML file. At the end we merge all these XML files into one file. My perhaps naive thought is to use the same approach for coverage and valgrind (that is, let each binary produce an artifact and merge them at the end).

We use gcov for coverage. It generates a .gcno file at build time and a .gcda file at runtime. I have not found any tool that can merge these files. A possible alternative is to convert the .gcno and .gcda files to another format, merge those files and use an Eclipse plugin to visualize the results. There are tools that produces merged Cobertura XML reports, but there are no plugins that can read and visualize Cobertura XML.

My alternatives seem to be to either write a tool that merges .gcno/.gcda files, or a plugin that reads cobertura XML.

Valgrind can produce XML files that Valkyrie can read. But there is no Eclipse plugin that can read these Valgrind XML files. I assume I have to write this plugin and possibly a tool that merges the XML files.

The fact that no one has written these tools and plugins yet probably mean that this is stupid way to solve the problem. Are there any better solutions?
Previous Topic:Error: Program "make" not found in PATH
Next Topic:Macros in assembler files
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Sep 24 04:39:15 GMT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02072 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software