0

I am trying to decide which code coverage tool I want to use with my CruiseControl.NET continuous integration server. Which would be a better tool: DotCover 2.1 or NCover 4.0 ?

user1409747
  • 91
  • 1
  • 8
  • This is not a question for stackoverflow. Your question depends on your opinions and requirements. – Simon Laing Nov 14 '12 at 07:30
  • hi, thanks for your insightful comment. i have seen several similar questions with pretty high ratings posted on stackoverflow before and hence considered posting here – user1409747 Nov 14 '12 at 09:17
  • Each one will have its benefit over the other. However it's not a question really, more of a debate. Choosing one over the other requires more information about what you are building and what you want from the coverage tool. – Simon Laing Nov 14 '12 at 16:33

1 Answers1

0

I think the metrics these tools provide is where your thought should go if this is just for CruiseControl.NET and not to be used in Visual Studio, since in general they both do a good job in the other areas. You might like to edit your question to clarify your requirements if that isn't the case, since for example dotCover has better ReSharper integration.

On the metrics topic, dotCover only provides statement-level coverage, while NCover provides sequence point, branch, and method coverage, as well as Cyclomatic Complexity, Change Risk Anti-Patterns (CRAP) and several other metrics.

If you have a large and complex codebase the extra metrics might be useful, but if you just want to get a general idea of what is covered and what isn't, statement coverage will still give you that. Branch coverage will be more useful if you have complex code because it makes it easier to find the areas of code that have the most uncovered branches which generally is more complicated code.

The NCover blog has a good post on the difference between all these metrics.

Jonathon Rossi
  • 4,149
  • 1
  • 22
  • 32