On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 10:48:01AM +0100, phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi Patrick > > On 03/09/2024 08:45, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 02:17:05PM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote: > > > Hi Patrick > > > > > > On 20/08/2024 15:02, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > > It might be a good opportunity to show the set-up and tear-down facilities > > > in clar as well instead of repeating the initialization in each test. > > > > I don't think it's a good fit here, as setup and teardown would hit the > > system under test. I rather think they should be used in cases where you > > e.g. always have to setup a repository for your tests. > > I'm not sure I follow. I was suggesting we define test_strvec__initialize() > to initialize a global strvec which the tests use and is then freed by > test_strvec__cleanup() like the tests/adding.c example the clar's README.md. > That would allow use to remove the setup and teardown from each test. As I > understand it clar's setup/cleanup functionality is usable without setting > up a sandbox directory for each test. What I'm saying is that `strvec_init()` itself is part of the system under test, so evicting that into a `__initialize()` function doesn't quite make sense to me. If there was for example a bug somewhere in the strvec code we might bring the global `struct strvec` into a state that is completely unusable, and thus all subsequent tests would fail. We could of course work around that by always zeroing out the struct, but because of that I just don't think it's a good fit. I rather see the usefulness of `__initialize()` in setting up auxiliary data structures that are a dependency of the system under test, but which are not the system under test itself. > I'll take a look at v7 in the next few days - I suspect we're getting to the > point where it's ready to be merged. Thanks!
