Coverage: convert coverage ranges to disjoint segments before further processing

Coverage: convert coverage ranges to disjoint segments before further processing

BUG=

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#456170}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/1ac3eb66b4138ba5ccdce9e470367763d6d2d887

[caseq, 2017-03-10 00:15:18]

This is to simplify merging of ranges from multiple instances of same resource
or from multiple coverage samples.

[caseq, 2017-03-10 00:15:37]

caseq@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ alph@chromium.org

[alph, 2017-03-10 02:05:09]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js:8: /**
@typedef {{end: number, count: (number|undefined), depth: number}} */
Wouldn't it be more convenient to have a start instead?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js:115: for
(var range of func.ranges)
slice it?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js:150:
function append(end, count, depth) {
annotate plz

https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageView.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageView.js:132: var
ranges = rangesByDepth[segment.depth - 1];  // depth === 0 => count ===
undefined
can you store depth-1 in segments?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageView.js:144: for
(var ranges of rangesByDepth) {
I didn't get why you need to iterate in the depth order?

[caseq, 2017-03-10 19:05:49]

On 2017/03/10 02:05:09, alph wrote:


>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
> File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js
> (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
> third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js:8: /**
> @typedef {{end: number, count: (number|undefined), depth: number}} */
> Wouldn't it be more convenient to have a start instead?

End is a bit more practical when merging (next patch)

> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
> third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js:115:
for
> (var range of func.ranges)
> slice it?

No.

> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
> third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageModel.js:150:
> function append(end, count, depth) {
> annotate plz

Done.

> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
> File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageView.js
> (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
> third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageView.js:132: var
> ranges = rangesByDepth[segment.depth - 1];  // depth === 0 => count ===
> undefined
> can you store depth-1 in segments?

So that 0 would become -1? That's a bit artificial :-)

>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
> third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/coverage/CoverageView.js:144: for
> (var ranges of rangesByDepth) {
> I didn't get why you need to iterate in the depth order?

This is to better render nested functions -- they'll effectively override outer
ranges in case they overlap (and they always do).

[caseq, 2017-03-10 19:13:56]

The CQ bit was checked by caseq@chromium.org

[caseq, 2017-03-10 19:13:56]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from alph@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002/#ps20001
(title: "review comment addressed")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-10 19:14:42]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-10 21:36:52]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 20001, "attempt_start_ts": 1489173236407270,
"parent_rev": "a51669425d5a771fb9f80663779135c1deffdb00", "commit_rev":
"1ac3eb66b4138ba5ccdce9e470367763d6d2d887"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-10 21:37:37]

Description was changed from

==========
Coverage: convert coverage ranges to disjoint segments before further processing

BUG=
==========

to

==========
Coverage: convert coverage ranges to disjoint segments before further processing

BUG=

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2740223002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#456170}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/1ac3eb66b4138ba5ccdce9e47036...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-10 21:37:39]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/1ac3eb66b4138ba5ccdce9e47036...