Coverage Logging and Profiler

Topics: General, Attention VFPX Admins
Developer
Jun 5, 2008 at 2:56 PM
I was about to write a survey / blog post about this but I thought I would jump in here instead to kick start a discussion.

How much are you using the Coverage logs provided with SET COVERAGE TO and are you using them with the Coverage Profile tool?

Lisa created a bunch of add-ons that could almost become PART of that tool that really add significant value to it.

Is that something that might be worth a new project here?
Jun 5, 2008 at 9:26 PM
Hi,
I personally always want to use it for performance and testing purpose. However, the existing coverage tool is not user friendly enough for me. If that is better tool available would definitely be used.
Coordinator
Jun 6, 2008 at 8:33 AM
Yes, I use the logs quite a bit as well when looking for bottlenecks or optimization options. However, I view them through the queries that can be found out on the Fox Wikis for looking at the logs as cursors in a meaningful fashion. I'd be interested in seeing the Coverage Profile tool extended.
Developer
Jun 6, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Yep, using the logs to analyze performance issues and trace what happens in scenarios that hard to debug like Activate/Refresh or Dynamic... property issues. Mostly I use the logs directly. The Coverage Profiler is too slow and hard to use. It's not very friendly for keyboard users, hard to open multiple instances of a log to compare different places, makes it virtually impossible to follow the execution flow rather, and so on. I'll be talking about coverage logs in my session at SWFox, but not that much about the coverage profiler, if that's any indication. ;-)
Developer
Jun 6, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Maybe a revised Analysis Profiler would make a useful add-on or something to take some of the add-ons that have been designed and make them more universally accessible.

Anyone want to take up the challenge? <g>