<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">Luis,<div><br></div><div>In short no reason. The patch should just be taken as a list of 14 tests, which currently are not being run. Arguments need to be determined for them.</div><div><br></div><div>If I recall correctly, my first goal was to determine the list of test which were being compiled but not being run. So I commented out all that appears to not be running, and tested. Then as I added tests, I un-commented the test file line. I was stashing and add via a patch, so I clearly made a mistake during the tedious process.</div><div><br></div><div>I hope this list is useful.</div><div><br></div><div>Brad</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Feb 14, 2014, at 7:32 AM, Luis Ibanez <<a href="mailto:luis.ibanez@kitware.com">luis.ibanez@kitware.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div dir="ltr">Brad,<div><br></div><div>Why are you commenting out the .cxx files in lines 42-45 ?</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://review.source.kitware.com/#/c/13646/2/Modules/Filtering/LabelMap/test/CMakeLists.txt">http://review.source.kitware.com/#/c/13646/2/Modules/Filtering/LabelMap/test/CMakeLists.txt</a><br>
</div><div><br></div><div>Wouldn't that reduce the code coverage instead of increasing it ?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"> Luis</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>