Re: [PATCH 2/7] reftable/basics: improve `binsearch()` test

> On 24/03/22 01:22PM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > The `binsearch()` test is somewhat weird in that it doesn't explicitly
> > spell out its expectations. Instead it does so in a rather ad-hoc way
> > with some hard-to-understand computations.
> > 
> > Refactor the test to spell out the needle as well as expected index for
> > all testcases. This refactoring highlights that the `binsearch_func()`
> > is written somewhat weirdly to find the first integer smaller than the
> > needle, not smaller or equal to it. Adjust the function accordingly.
> > 
> > While at it, rename the callback function to better convey its meaning.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
> > ---
> >  reftable/basics_test.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> >  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/reftable/basics_test.c b/reftable/basics_test.c
> > index dc1c87c5df..85c4d1621c 100644
> > --- a/reftable/basics_test.c
> > +++ b/reftable/basics_test.c
> > @@ -12,40 +12,47 @@ license that can be found in the LICENSE file or at
> >  #include "test_framework.h"
> >  #include "reftable-tests.h"
> >  
> > -struct binsearch_args {
> > -	int key;
> > -	int *arr;
> > +struct integer_needle_lesseq {
> > +	int needle;
> > +	int *haystack;
> >  };
> 
> This is probably just personal preference, but I think `key` and `arr`
> in this case are a bit more straightforward.