Changes since v1:
- replace "if (TEST_RUN(...))" with "for_test (...)", a macro based on the
keyword "for" that doesn't require changes to existing functions,
- clarify the commit messages of patches 3 and 5,
- convert the strbuf initialization tests as well.
t0080: move expected output to a file
unit-tests: add for_test
t-ctype: use for_test
t-reftable-basics: use for_test
t-strvec: use for_test
t-strbuf: use for_test
.clang-format | 2 +
t/helper/test-example-tap.c | 33 +++
t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh | 48 +----
t/t0080/expect | 76 +++++++
t/unit-tests/t-ctype.c | 4 +-
t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c | 228 +++++++++-----------
t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c | 122 ++++++-----
t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c | 356 ++++++++++++++-----------------
t/unit-tests/test-lib.h | 19 ++
9 files changed, 454 insertions(+), 434 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 t/t0080/expect
Range-Diff gegen v1:
1: 6efe5a37f0 = 1: 5faabaea54 t0080: move expected output to a file
2: 8297c2b121 < -: ---------- unit-tests: add TEST_RUN
-: ---------- > 2: d4f9fa0938 unit-tests: add for_test
3: ec5599906d ! 3: a7cd5a2a3a t-ctype: use TEST_RUN
@@ Metadata
Author: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> ## Commit message ##
- t-ctype: use TEST_RUN
+ t-ctype: use for_test - Use the macro TEST_RUN instead of the internal functions
- test__run_begin() and test__run_end().
+ Use the documented macro for_test instead of the internal functions
+ test__run_begin() and test__run_end(), which are supposed to be private
+ to the unit test framework. ## t/unit-tests/t-ctype.c ##
@@
@@ t/unit-tests/t-ctype.c
BUILD_ASSERT_OR_ZERO(sizeof(string[0]) == sizeof(char)); \
- int skip = test__run_begin(); \
- if (!skip) { \
-+ if (TEST_RUN(#class " works")) { \
++ for_test (#class " works") { \
for (int i = 0; i < 256; i++) { \
if (!check_int(class(i), ==, !!memchr(string, i, len)))\
test_msg(" i: 0x%02x", i); \
4: e589468f98 ! 4: cc07910f88 t-reftable-basics: use TEST_RUN
@@ Metadata
Author: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> ## Commit message ##
- t-reftable-basics: use TEST_RUN
+ t-reftable-basics: use for_test The macro TEST takes a single expression. If a test requires multiple
statements then they need to be placed in a function that's called in
the TEST expression. Remove the overhead of defining and calling single-use functions by
- using TEST_RUN instead.
+ using for_test instead. Run the tests in the order of definition. We can reorder them like that
because they are independent. Technically this changes the output, but
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
- struct integer_needle_lesseq_args args = {
- .haystack = haystack,
- .needle = testcases[i].needle,
-+ if (TEST_RUN("binary search with binsearch works")) {
++ for_test ("binary search with binsearch works") {
+ int haystack[] = { 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 };
+ struct {
+ int needle;
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
- const char *a[] = { "a", "b", "c", NULL };
- const char *b[] = { "a", "b", "d", NULL };
- const char *c[] = { "a", "b", NULL };
-+ if (TEST_RUN("names_length retuns size of a NULL-terminated string array")) {
++ for_test ("names_length retuns size of a NULL-terminated string array") {
+ const char *a[] = { "a", "b", NULL };
+ check_int(names_length(a), ==, 2);
+ }
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
- check(!names_equal(a, b));
- check(!names_equal(a, c));
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("names_equal compares NULL-terminated string arrays")) {
++ for_test ("names_equal compares NULL-terminated string arrays") {
+ const char *a[] = { "a", "b", "c", NULL };
+ const char *b[] = { "a", "b", "d", NULL };
+ const char *c[] = { "a", "b", NULL };
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
- check(!out[2]);
- free_names(out);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("parse_names works for basic input")) {
++ for_test ("parse_names works for basic input") {
+ char in1[] = "line\n";
+ char in2[] = "a\nb\nc";
+ char **out = NULL;
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
- check_int(common_prefix_size(&a, &b), ==, cases[i].want);
- strbuf_reset(&a);
- strbuf_reset(&b);
-+ if (TEST_RUN("parse_names drops empty string")) {
++ for_test ("parse_names drops empty string") {
+ char in[] = "a\n\nb\n";
+ char **out = NULL;
+ parse_names(in, strlen(in), &out);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
- out = get_be24(dest);
- check_int(in, ==, out);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("common_prefix_size works")) {
++ for_test ("common_prefix_size works") {
+ struct strbuf a = STRBUF_INIT;
+ struct strbuf b = STRBUF_INIT;
+ struct {
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
- TEST(test_names_equal(), "names_equal compares NULL-terminated string arrays");
- TEST(test_u24_roundtrip(), "put_be24 and get_be24 work");
- TEST(test_u16_roundtrip(), "put_be16 and get_be16 work");
-+ if (TEST_RUN("put_be24 and get_be24 work")) {
++ for_test ("put_be24 and get_be24 work") {
+ uint32_t in = 0x112233;
+ uint8_t dest[3];
+ uint32_t out;
@@ t/unit-tests/t-reftable-basics.c: static int integer_needle_lesseq(size_t i, voi
+ check_int(in, ==, out);
+ }
+
-+ if (TEST_RUN("put_be16 and get_be16 work")) {
++ for_test ("put_be16 and get_be16 work") {
+ uint32_t in = 0xfef1;
+ uint8_t dest[3];
+ uint32_t out;
5: 5805a9cbd7 ! 5: 11c1675a13 t-strvec: use TEST_RUN
@@ Metadata
Author: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> ## Commit message ##
- t-strvec: use TEST_RUN
+ t-strvec: use for_test The macro TEST takes a single expression. If a test requires multiple
statements then they need to be placed in a function that's called in
the TEST expression. - Remove the overhead of defining and calling single-use functions by
- using TEST_RUN instead.
+ Remove the cognitive overhead of defining and calling single-use
+ functions by using for_test instead. ## t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c ##
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct strvec *vec, ...)
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_uint(vec.nr, ==, 0);
- check_uint(vec.alloc, ==, 0);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("static initialization")) {
++ for_test ("static initialization") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ check_pointer_eq(vec.v, empty_strvec);
+ check_uint(vec.nr, ==, 0);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_uint(vec.nr, ==, 0);
- check_uint(vec.alloc, ==, 0);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("dynamic initialization")) {
++ for_test ("dynamic initialization") {
+ struct strvec vec;
+ strvec_init(&vec);
+ check_pointer_eq(vec.v, empty_strvec);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_uint(vec.nr, ==, 0);
- check_uint(vec.alloc, ==, 0);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("clear")) {
++ for_test ("clear") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_push(&vec, "foo");
+ strvec_clear(&vec);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
-static void t_push(void)
-{
- struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
-+ if (TEST_RUN("push")) {
++ for_test ("push") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT; - strvec_push(&vec, "foo");
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo: 1", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("pushf")) {
++ for_test ("pushf") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushf(&vec, "foo: %d", 1);
+ check_strvec(&vec, "foo: 1", NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("pushl")) {
++ for_test ("pushl") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL,
- };
- struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
-+ if (TEST_RUN("pushv")) {
++ for_test ("pushv") {
+ const char *strings[] = {
+ "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL,
+ };
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "replaced", "bar", "baz", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("replace at head")) {
++ for_test ("replace at head") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ strvec_replace(&vec, 0, "replaced");
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", "replaced", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("replace at tail")) {
++ for_test ("replace at tail") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ strvec_replace(&vec, 2, "replaced");
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "replaced", "baz", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("replace in between")) {
++ for_test ("replace in between") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ strvec_replace(&vec, 1, "replaced");
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "oo", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("replace with substring")) {
++ for_test ("replace with substring") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", NULL);
+ strvec_replace(&vec, 0, vec.v[0] + 1);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "bar", "baz", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("remove at head")) {
++ for_test ("remove at head") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ strvec_remove(&vec, 0);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("remove at tail")) {
++ for_test ("remove at tail") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ strvec_remove(&vec, 2);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "baz", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("remove in between")) {
++ for_test ("remove in between") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ strvec_remove(&vec, 1);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("pop with empty array")) {
++ for_test ("pop with empty array") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pop(&vec);
+ check_strvec(&vec, NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("pop with non-empty array")) {
++ for_test ("pop with non-empty array") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_pushl(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
+ strvec_pop(&vec);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("split empty string")) {
++ for_test ("split empty string") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_split(&vec, "");
+ check_strvec(&vec, NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("split single item")) {
++ for_test ("split single item") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_split(&vec, "foo");
+ check_strvec(&vec, "foo", NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("split multiple items")) {
++ for_test ("split multiple items") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_split(&vec, "foo bar baz");
+ check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("split whitespace only")) {
++ for_test ("split whitespace only") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_split(&vec, " \t\n");
+ check_strvec(&vec, NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
- check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", NULL);
- strvec_clear(&vec);
-}
-+ if (TEST_RUN("split multiple consecutive whitespaces")) {
++ for_test ("split multiple consecutive whitespaces") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ strvec_split(&vec, "foo\n\t bar");
+ check_strvec(&vec, "foo", "bar", NULL);
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strvec.c: static void check_strvec_loc(const char *loc, struct st
-{
- struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
- const char **detached;
-+ if (TEST_RUN("detach")) {
++ for_test ("detach") {
+ struct strvec vec = STRVEC_INIT;
+ const char **detached;6: 188b31884b ! 6: cd79132f95 t-strbuf: use TEST_RUN
@@ Metadata
Author: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> ## Commit message ##
- t-strbuf: use TEST_RUN
+ t-strbuf: use for_test The macro TEST takes a single expression. If a test requires multiple
statements then they need to be placed in a function that's called in
@@ Commit message
are used for that purpose and take another function as an argument,
making the control flow hard to follow. - Remove the overhead of these functions by using TEST_RUN instead. Move
+ Remove the overhead of these functions by using for_test instead. Move
their duplicate post-condition checks into a new helper, t_release(),
and let t_addch() and t_addstr() accept properly typed input parameters
instead of void pointers.
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c
static int assert_sane_strbuf(struct strbuf *buf)
{
/* Initialized strbufs should always have a non-NULL buffer */
-@@ t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c: static void t_dynamic_init(void)
- strbuf_release(&buf);
+@@ t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c: static int assert_sane_strbuf(struct strbuf *buf)
+ return check_uint(buf->len, <, buf->alloc);
} --static void t_addch(struct strbuf *buf, const void *data)
+-static void t_static_init(void)
+static void t_addch(struct strbuf *buf, int ch)
{
+- struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
+-
+- check_uint(buf.len, ==, 0);
+- check_uint(buf.alloc, ==, 0);
+- check_char(buf.buf[0], ==, '\0');
+-}
+-
+-static void t_dynamic_init(void)
+-{
+- struct strbuf buf;
+-
+- strbuf_init(&buf, 1024);
+- check(assert_sane_strbuf(&buf));
+- check_uint(buf.len, ==, 0);
+- check_uint(buf.alloc, >=, 1024);
+- check_char(buf.buf[0], ==, '\0');
+- strbuf_release(&buf);
+-}
+-
+-static void t_addch(struct strbuf *buf, const void *data)
+-{
- const char *p_ch = data;
- const char ch = *p_ch;
size_t orig_alloc = buf->alloc;
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c: static void t_addstr(struct strbuf *buf, const void *da
+
int cmd_main(int argc, const char **argv)
{
- if (!TEST(t_static_init(), "static initialization works"))
- test_skip_all("STRBUF_INIT is broken");
- TEST(t_dynamic_init(), "dynamic initialization works");
+- if (!TEST(t_static_init(), "static initialization works"))
+- test_skip_all("STRBUF_INIT is broken");
+- TEST(t_dynamic_init(), "dynamic initialization works");
- TEST(setup(t_addch, "a"), "strbuf_addch adds char");
- TEST(setup(t_addch, ""), "strbuf_addch adds NUL char");
- TEST(setup_populated(t_addch, "initial value", "a"),
@@ t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c: static void t_addstr(struct strbuf *buf, const void *da
- TEST(setup(t_addstr, "hello there"), "strbuf_addstr adds string");
- TEST(setup_populated(t_addstr, "initial value", "hello there"),
- "strbuf_addstr appends string to initial value");
++ for_test ("static initialization works") {
++ struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
++
++ if (!check_uint(buf.len, ==, 0) ||
++ !check_uint(buf.alloc, ==, 0) ||
++ !check_char(buf.buf[0], ==, '\0'))
++ test_skip_all("STRBUF_INIT is broken");
++ }
++
++ for_test ("dynamic initialization works") {
++ struct strbuf buf;
++
++ strbuf_init(&buf, 1024);
++ check(assert_sane_strbuf(&buf));
++ check_uint(buf.len, ==, 0);
++ check_uint(buf.alloc, >=, 1024);
++ check_char(buf.buf[0], ==, '\0');
++ strbuf_release(&buf);
++ }
+
-+ if (TEST_RUN("strbuf_addch adds char")) {
++ for_test ("strbuf_addch adds char") {
+ struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
+ t_addch(&sb, 'a');
+ t_release(&sb);
+ }
+
-+ if (TEST_RUN("strbuf_addch adds NUL char")) {
++ for_test ("strbuf_addch adds NUL char") {
+ struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
+ t_addch(&sb, '\0');
+ t_release(&sb);
+ }
+
-+ if (TEST_RUN("strbuf_addch appends to initial value")) {
++ for_test ("strbuf_addch appends to initial value") {
+ struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
+ t_addstr(&sb, "initial value");
+ t_addch(&sb, 'a');
+ t_release(&sb);
+ }
+
-+ if (TEST_RUN("strbuf_addstr adds string")) {
++ for_test ("strbuf_addstr adds string") {
+ struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
+ t_addstr(&sb, "hello there");
+ t_release(&sb);
+ }
+
-+ if (TEST_RUN("strbuf_addstr appends string to initial value")) {
++ for_test ("strbuf_addstr appends string to initial value") {
+ struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
+ t_addstr(&sb, "initial value");
+ t_addstr(&sb, "hello there");
--
2.45.2René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>