New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
numeric metric for calltree bitmap? #406
Comments
yep! |
Related to this, it might be nice to include some form of historical data in fuzz introspector (i.e. data from many coverage analysis runs and/or static analysis runs) so that we can do data analysis on progress/deterioration. |
Thanks, it wasn't clear to me that this was the same metric -- i.e. is that number talking about functions or call sites? |
@DavidKorczynski would it make sense to clarify this part in the UI? Is this measuring covered functions / reachable functions or covered callsites / reachable callsites? Or am I horribly misunderstanding something here? |
It would. I'm working on improving doc and user experience these days. Will try to make this more intuitive.
The representation I showed is missing functions and not callsites which is what the calltree represents, which is what the bitmap shows. On that note I agree we should get a numeric representation of the callsites. Good catch. |
#420 fixes this in the following way: |
* report: add numeric represntation of calltree Fixes: #406 * remove f strings when not needed * Add percentage data * rephrase
It may be useful for devs to compare the improvements they made wrt calltree bitmap. Right now the only way to do this is to eyeball the colouring on the report.
Would it make sense to add a percentage value here?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: