Re: [PATCH 2/5] t/unit-tests: convert oid-array test to use clar

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Seyi

On 24/02/2025 09:11, Seyi Chamber wrote:
On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 at 15:38, Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Seyi

On 20/02/2025 08:29, Seyi Kuforiji wrote:
Adapt oid-array test script to clar framework by using clar assertions
where necessary. Remove descriptions from macros to reduce
redundancy, and move test input arrays to global scope for reuse across
multiple test functions. Introduce `test_oid_array__initialize()` to
explicitly initialize the hash algorithm.

These changes streamline the test suite, making individual tests
self-contained and reducing redundant code.

I think these conversion look correct but once again we're losing
valuable debugging information because we haven't added better
assertions to clear.


I understand your concern about losing debugging information, but it
is more beneficial to prioritize clarity and simplicity in unit tests.
Unit tests should be short and easy, and adding extra debugging
messages increases complexity, making them harder to maintain and
read. The assertion failures already indicate where an issue occurs,
allowing whoever is debugging to inspect the test inputs directly if
needed.

If the test failure is on a CI run for a platform that the person debugging the failure does not have access to how are they going to do that? This is not a hypothetical concern as our CI runs the test suite on MacOs, Linux and Windows. Individual developers often only have access to one or to of those platforms. My experience of debugging CI test failures is that without decent diagnostic messages it is extremely difficult to figure out what went wrong if one does not have access to the platform where the test is failing.

Assertion failures are rarely hit in real-world scenarios, and when
they do occur, one can manually print values or use a debugger to
investigate. This makes the additional debugging messages unnecessary
in most cases.

This seems to be arguing that because we expect the tests to pass we don't need to worry about how difficult it is to debug them when they fail. I do not agree with that line of argument.

The lack of explicit debugging output is not a
significant issue in practice. Furthermore, there are plans to
collaborate with Clar upstream to equip common assertions with the
ability to print custom messages in a formatted string where an error
occurs. This would allow our test to be simple and easy to read and
also maintain some of our custom debug messages.

Have you got any more details about this please? We already have cl_failf() in our codebase.

Best Wishes

Phillip



       oid_array_for_each_unique(&input, add_to_oid_array, &actual);
-     if (!check_uint(actual.nr, ==, expect.nr))
-             return;
-
-     for (i = 0; i < actual.nr; i++) {
-             if (!check(oideq(&actual.oid[i], &expect.oid[i])))
-                     test_msg("expected: %s\n       got: %s\n     index: %" PRIuMAX,
-                              oid_to_hex(&expect.oid[i]), oid_to_hex(&actual.oid[i]),
-                              (uintmax_t)i);
-     }
+     cl_assert_equal_i(actual.nr, expect.nr);
+
+     for (i = 0; i < actual.nr; i++)
+             cl_assert(oideq(&actual.oid[i], &expect.oid[i]));

If this fails the poor person debugging it will have no idea why as
there is now no indication of which two oids were being compared.

-     if (!check_int(ret, <=, upper_bound) ||
-         !check_int(ret, >=, lower_bound))
-             test_msg("oid query for lookup: %s", oid_to_hex(&oid_query));
+     cl_assert(ret <= upper_bound);
+     cl_assert(ret >= lower_bound);

This is another case where we could do with better assertions in clar

-static void setup(void)
+void test_oid_array__initialize(void)
   {
       /* The hash algo is used by oid_array_lookup() internally */
       int algo = init_hash_algo();
-     if (check_int(algo, !=, GIT_HASH_UNKNOWN))
-             repo_set_hash_algo(the_repository, algo);
+     cl_assert(algo != GIT_HASH_UNKNOWN);

init_has_algo() in unit-test.c already does this.


Thanks for spotting this! Will fix this in an updated patch.
Best Wishes

Phillip


+     repo_set_hash_algo(the_repository, algo);
   }

-int cmd_main(int argc UNUSED, const char **argv UNUSED)
+static const char *arr_input[] = { "88", "44", "aa", "55" };
+static const char *arr_input_dup[] = { "88", "44", "aa", "55",
+                                    "88", "44", "aa", "55",
+                                    "88", "44", "aa", "55" };
+static const char *res_sorted[] = { "44", "55", "88", "aa" };
+
+void test_oid_array__enumerate_unique(void)
   {
-     const char *arr_input[] = { "88", "44", "aa", "55" };
-     const char *arr_input_dup[] = { "88", "44", "aa", "55",
-                                     "88", "44", "aa", "55",
-                                     "88", "44", "aa", "55" };
-     const char *res_sorted[] = { "44", "55", "88", "aa" };
-     const char *nearly_55;
+     TEST_ENUMERATION(arr_input, res_sorted);
+}
+
+void test_oid_array__enumerate_duplicate(void)
+{
+     TEST_ENUMERATION(arr_input_dup, res_sorted);
+}
+
+void test_oid_array__lookup(void)
+{
+     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input, "55", 1, 1);
+}

-     if (!TEST(setup(), "setup"))
-             test_skip_all("hash algo initialization failed");
+void test_oid_array__lookup_non_existent(void)
+{
+     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input, "33", INT_MIN, -1);
+}
+
+void test_oid_array__lookup_duplicates(void)
+{
+     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input_dup, "55", 3, 5);
+}

-     TEST_ENUMERATION(arr_input, res_sorted, "ordered enumeration");
-     TEST_ENUMERATION(arr_input_dup, res_sorted,
-                      "ordered enumeration with duplicate suppression");
+void test_oid_array__lookup_non_existent_dup(void)
+{
+     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input_dup, "66", INT_MIN, -1);
+}

-     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input, "55", 1, 1, "lookup");
-     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input, "33", INT_MIN, -1, "lookup non-existent entry");
-     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input_dup, "55", 3, 5, "lookup with duplicates");
-     TEST_LOOKUP(arr_input_dup, "66", INT_MIN, -1,
-                 "lookup non-existent entry with duplicates");
+void test_oid_array__lookup_almost_dup(void)
+{
+     const char *nearly_55;

       nearly_55 = init_hash_algo() == GIT_HASH_SHA1 ?
                       "5500000000000000000000000000000000000001" :
                       "5500000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001";
-     TEST_LOOKUP(((const char *[]){ "55", nearly_55 }), "55", 0, 0,
-                 "lookup with almost duplicate values");
-     TEST_LOOKUP(((const char *[]){ "55", "55" }), "55", 0, 1,
-                 "lookup with single duplicate value");

-     return test_done();
+     TEST_LOOKUP(((const char *[]){ "55", nearly_55 }), "55", 0, 0);
+}
+
+void test_oid_array__lookup_single_dup(void)
+{
+     TEST_LOOKUP(((const char *[]){ "55", "55" }), "55", 0, 1);
   }


Thanks
Seyi





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux