Home/ Questions/Q 262365
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-11T22:30:34+00:00

I have installed on my computer C++Test only with UnitTest license (only Unit Test

  • 0

I have installed on my computer C++Test only with UnitTest license (only Unit Test license) as a Visual Studio 2005 plugin ( cpptest_7.2.11.35_win32_vs2005_plugin.exe ).

I have a sample similar to the following:

bool MyFunction(... parameters... )
{
    bool bRet = true;

        // do something
    if( some_condition )
    {
        // do something
        bRet = CallToAFunctionThatCanReturnBothTrueAndFalse....
    }
    else
    {
        bRet = false;
        // do something
    }

    if(bRet == false)
    {
        // do something
    }

    return bRet;
}

In my case after running the coverage tool I have the following results (for a function similar to the previously mentioned):

[LC=100 BC=100 PC=75 DC=100 SCC=100 MCDC=50 (%)]

I really don’t understand why I don’t have 100% coverage when it comes to PathCoverage (PC).
Also if someone who has experience with C++Test Parasoft could explain the low MCDC coverage for me that would be great.

What should I do to increase coverage? as I’m out of ideas in this case.
Directions to (some parts of) the documentation are welcome.

Thank you,

Iulian

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    This is a good reference on the various types of code coverage: http://www.bullseye.com/coverage.html.

    MCDC: To improve MCDC coverage you’ll need to look at some_condition. Assuming it’s a complex boolean expression, you’ll need to look at whether you’re exercising the necessary combinations of values. Specifically, each boolean sub-expression needs to be exercised true and false.

    Path: One of the things mentioned in the link above as being a disadvantage of path coverage is that many paths are impossible to exercise. That may be the case with your example.

    • 0