Thanks Rusty, At Wed, 01 Apr 2015 11:59:39 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > Hajime Tazaki <tazaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > the issue here is the decision between 'no-ops' and > > 'assert(false)' depends on the context. an auto-generated > > mechanism needs some hand-written parameters I think. > > Yes, I used auto-generated (fprintf, abort) stubs for similar testing in > pettycoin, where if it failed to link it would generate such stubs > for undefined symbols. > > It's not a panacea, but it helps speed up rejiggin after code changes. > Generating noop stubs can actually make that process slower, as you can > get failures because you now need to do something in that stub. is it the following ? it's really cool stuff ! https://github.com/rustyrussell/pettycoin/blob/master/test/mockup.sh -- Hajime -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>