Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] Bisect_ppx 1.0.0 – Modernized code coverage for OCaml

[Alain Frisch <alain.frisch@lexifi.com>]

On 10/02/2016 20:33, Anton Bachin wrote:
> Assuming this is what Gerd is indeed looking for, I can confirm that
> Bisect_ppx
> still supports it. See
>
> https://github.com/rleonid/bisect_ppx/blob/master/doc/advanced.md#unreachable-code
>
> We preferred to document only BISECT_VISIT (which does the same thing),
> in order
> to have only option. But both Bisect_ppx and Bisect support BISECT_MARK and
> BISECT_VISIT.


It's great to see the development of Bisect resurrecting!


Did you consider switching to attributes to mark code that must be 
excluded from the analysis, instead of special comments?  This seems 
simpler than having to scan again the source files, and it could be more 
robust when interacting with other ppx tools.

For instance:


- Marking a sub-expression, often using the shorthand syntax:

   begin[@bisect.visit]
     ...
   end

- Marking a complete function:


   let f x =
      ...
   [@@bisect.visit]

   or (in OCaml 4.03):

   let[@bisect.visit] f x =
      ...

- Marking sections:


     [@@@bisect.visit.begin]
     ...
     [@@@bisect.visit.end]



Alain