On 07/22/2013 04:24 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> Pretty thorough, although I thought of a couple other ideas to test: >> i64=5z-6 should fail; i64=5-6-7 should fail > > I can add them if you insist, but I wrote (and single-stepped all of) > the test cases so that all branches added by patches 3, 5 and 6 would be > covered. (Some of the final tests in this function are actually > redundant, but I liked how they looked :)) > > For example, "i64=5z-6" is no different from "i64=5z", in patch 3 both > the first added (*endptr == '\0') condition and the (*endptr == '-') > fail the same way for both input strings: we never look past the "z". > > Likewise, "i64=5-6-7" is the same case as "i64=5-6z": both characters > after the "6" (ie. "-" and "z") violate the second added (*endptr == > '\0') condition in patch 3 the same way. > > Do you accept this argument? :)
Yes, I can agree you have 100% code coverage as currently coded. Adding what currently forms redundant cases may avoid future patch-writers from breaking 100% coverage while actually triggering different paths between the cases; but at the same time, we can assume such a future patch-writer would be adding some new feature to the parser, and could expand the testsuite accordingly as part of their efforts. So no, I won't insist on a respin :) -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
