Hi,
I'm not in one of the two cases you listed.
BUT: I'm not able to put a breakpoint to the functions I'm missing. Message while debugging is: "The breakpoint will not currently be hit. No executable code of the debugger's target code type".
So I think this is the reason for the missing "Executable lines". I disabled all compiler optimization and tried different compiler and linker flag with no success.
I see, this is not a bug. Anyway I'm unsatisfied with this behavior. In my current situation with a large bunch of untested c++ code, OpenCppCoverage gives me a wrong indication about untested (uncovered) and tested (covered) code.
With your knowledge about code coverage: Do you have an idea how to track the "not executable lines" of code and add them to the count of uncovered lines?
Thanks and regards
Jan
I'm not in one of the two cases you listed.
BUT: I'm not able to put a breakpoint to the functions I'm missing. Message while debugging is: "The breakpoint will not currently be hit. No executable code of the debugger's target code type".
So I think this is the reason for the missing "Executable lines". I disabled all compiler optimization and tried different compiler and linker flag with no success.
I see, this is not a bug. Anyway I'm unsatisfied with this behavior. In my current situation with a large bunch of untested c++ code, OpenCppCoverage gives me a wrong indication about untested (uncovered) and tested (covered) code.
With your knowledge about code coverage: Do you have an idea how to track the "not executable lines" of code and add them to the count of uncovered lines?
Thanks and regards
Jan









