Re: Improving JaCoCo's branch coverage of a Groovy assert statement

On 09.12.22 11:51, Damir Murat wrote:
[...]
> simple assert
> statement like
>
>      assert firstName != null
>
> Groovy generates something like
>
>      ValueRecorder var1 = new ValueRecorder();
>      try {
>        String var10000 = this.firstName;
>        var1.record(var10000, 8);
>        var1.record(var10000, 8);
>        if (var10000 != null) {
>          var1.clear();
>        } else {
>          ScriptBytecodeAdapter.assertFailed(AssertionRenderer.render("assert firstName != null", var1), (Object)null);
>        }
>      } catch (Throwable var3) {
>        var1.clear();
>        throw var3;
>      }

I would have assumed you mean something like this:

>>      String var10000 = this.firstName;
>>      var1.record(var10000, 8);
>>      var1.record(var10000, 8);
>>      if (!(var10000 != null)) {
>>        exception = SBA.failure(AssertionRenderer.render("assert firstName != null", var1), (Object)null);
>>      }
>>      var1.clear();
>>      if (exception != null) throw exception

and I would have asked why this does not also have a branch coverage
problem. But you suggest instead this:

>     try {
>       var10000 = this.firstName;
>       var1.record(var10000, 8);
>       var1.record(var10000, 8);
>       if (var10000 != null) {
>         var1.clear();
>       } else {
>         Throwable throwable = fetchAssertFailed(AssertionRenderer.render("assert firstName != null", var1), (Object)null);
>         throw throwable
>       }
>     } catch (Throwable var3) {
>       var1.clear();
>       throw var3;
>     }

and I see that this variant avoids the additional if-branch, nice.

bye Jochen