On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:26 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Currently, given something (fairly dystopian) like > > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) > > KUnit will prints a failure message like this. > > Expected 2 + 2 == 5, but > > 2 + 2 == 4 > > 5 == 5 > > With this patch, the output just becomes > > Expected 2 + 2 == 5, but > > 2 + 2 == 4 > > This patch is slightly hacky, but it's quite common* to compare an > expression to a literal integer value, so this can make KUnit less > chatty in many cases. (This patch also fixes variants like > KUNIT_EXPECT_GT, LE, et al.). > > It also allocates an additional string briefly, but given this only > happens on test failures, it doesn't seem too bad a tradeoff. > Also, in most cases it'll realize the lengths are unequal and bail out > before the allocation. > > We could save the result of the formatted string to avoid wasting this > extra work, but it felt cleaner to leave it as-is. > > Edge case: for something silly and unrealistic like > > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 4, 5); > > It'll generate this message with a trailing "but" > > Expected 2 + 2 == 5, but > > <next line of normal output> > > It didn't feel worth adding a check up-front to see if both sides are > literals to handle this better. > > *A quick grep suggests 100+ comparisons to an integer literal as the > right hand side. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx> I don't feel very strongly about this either way. In any case: Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
