René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> writes:
> If we get an unexpected result, the prio-queue unit test reports it like
> this:
>
> # check "result[j++] == show(get)" failed at t/unit-tests/t-prio-queue.c:43
> # left: 5
> # right: 1
> # failed at result[] index 0
>
> That last line repeats "failed" and "result" from the first line.
> Shorten it to resemble a similar one in t-ctype and also remove the
> incrementation from the first line to avoid possible distractions from
> the message of which comparison went wrong where:
>
> # check "result[j] == show(get)" failed at t/unit-tests/t-prio-queue.c:43
> # left: 5
> # right: 1
> # j: 0
Very nice touch, especially the removal of ++ from the message ;-).
> Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx>
> ---
> t/unit-tests/t-prio-queue.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/unit-tests/t-prio-queue.c b/t/unit-tests/t-prio-queue.c
> index d78b002f9e..616d0fc86f 100644
> --- a/t/unit-tests/t-prio-queue.c
> +++ b/t/unit-tests/t-prio-queue.c
> @@ -31,16 +31,18 @@ static void test_prio_queue(int *input, int *result, size_t input_size)
> get = prio_queue_get(&pq);
> if (!check(peek == get))
> return;
> - if(!check_int(result[j++], ==, show(get)))
> - test_msg("failed at result[] index %d", j-1);
> + if (!check_int(result[j], ==, show(get)))
> + test_msg(" j: %d", j);
> + j++;
> break;
> case DUMP:
> while ((peek = prio_queue_peek(&pq))) {
> get = prio_queue_get(&pq);
> if (!check(peek == get))
> return;
> - if(!check_int(result[j++], ==, show(get)))
> - test_msg("failed at result[] index %d", j-1);
> + if (!check_int(result[j], ==, show(get)))
> + test_msg(" j: %d", j);
> + j++;
> }
> break;
> case STACK:
> --
> 2.44.0
