On 29/06/2023 06:52, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 02:15:39PM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote:
On 21/06/2023 16:57, Linus Arver wrote:
- Make the 'TEST' macro accept the test description first. Or, keep the
'TEST' macro but also name a new macro 'IT' that accepts the
description first, to encourage usage that reads in a
behavior-driven-development (BDD) style, like 'IT("should accept
foo",
t_bar(...))'. I find some test descriptions easier to write this way.
The test description is a printf style format string followed by
arguments. This allows parameterized tests to include the parameter
values in the description to aid debugging but it means the test
function must be the first parameter. We could have IT("should accept
%d", t(), i) but that would be a bit weird.
with some minor preprocessor magic [1], you could make that
IT(("should accept %d", i), t(i))
which would be somewhat more noisy, but arguably even somewhat clearer.
notably,
IT("should accept foo", t())
would still work with the same macro.
[1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/62984543/3685191
Thanks, I'd not come across that trick before. As you say it is a it
noisy though.
somewhat on a tangent: it's also possible to overload macros on argument
count [2], which may also come in handy.
[2] https://stackoverflow.com/a/24028231/3685191
When I was writing my original reply to Linus I did wonder if we could
count the arguments. I didn't pursue it as I don't really want to create
a dozen different macros for different argument counts. I think TEST()
is understandable by anyone reading the code whereas IT() seems a bit
odd unless one is used to BDD.
Best Wishes
Phillip
