Hi Josh and René On 01/07/2024 20:58, Josh Steadmon wrote:
On 2024.06.29 17:47, René Scharfe wrote: I think this commit in particular shows how TEST_RUN() is more convenient than TEST(). (Although, arguably we shouldn't have allowed the setup() + callback situation to start with.)
I think the counterargument to that is that using TEST_RUN() makes the tests noisier and more error prone because each one has to be wrapped in an if() statement and has more boiler plate initializing and freeing the strbuf rather than getting that for free by calling the test function via setup().
Having said that I don't mind the changes in this patch if that's the way others want to go. Getting rid of the untyped test arguments is definitely a benefit of this approach.
Best Wishes Phillip
