I'm pretty sure the error code is returned via 'errno', not as a
return value. Re-read the specification again.
On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>
>> Merge this with the previous commits to only provide 1 single commit
>> adding this new test.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Aditya Upadhyay
>> wrote:
>> > ---
>> > testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am| 5 --
>> > testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac | 5 --
>> > testsuites/psxtests/psxinttypes01/init.c | 66
>> > +++---
>> > .../psxtests/psxinttypes01/psxinttypes01.scn | 8 +++
>> > 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> > b/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> > index cda0061..5d3d41d 100644
>> > --- a/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> > +++ b/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> > @@ -59,11 +59,6 @@ _SUBDIRS += psxintrcritical01
>> > _SUBDIRS += psxitimer
>> > endif
>> > _SUBDIRS += psxinttypes01
>> > -_SUBDIRS += psxinttypes02
>> > -_SUBDIRS += psxinttypes03
>> > -_SUBDIRS += psxinttypes04
>> > -_SUBDIRS += psxinttypes05
>> > -_SUBDIRS += psxinttypes06
>> > _SUBDIRS += psxkey01
>> > _SUBDIRS += psxkey02
>> > _SUBDIRS += psxkey03
>> > diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
>> > b/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
>> > index dd5f23f..b2b00b7 100644
>> > --- a/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
>> > +++ b/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
>> > @@ -163,11 +163,6 @@ psximfs01/Makefile
>> > psximfs02/Makefile
>> > psxintrcritical01/Makefile
>> > psxinttypes01/Makefile
>> > -psxinttypes02/Makefile
>> > -psxinttypes03/Makefile
>> > -psxinttypes04/Makefile
>> > -psxinttypes05/Makefile
>> > -psxinttypes06/Makefile
>> > psxitimer/Makefile
>> > psxkey01/Makefile
>> > psxkey02/Makefile
>> > diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/psxinttypes01/init.c
>> > b/testsuites/psxtests/psxinttypes01/init.c
>> > index ad41a6d..72f036a 100644
>> > --- a/testsuites/psxtests/psxinttypes01/init.c
>> > +++ b/testsuites/psxtests/psxinttypes01/init.c
>> > @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
>> > /*
>> > - * This is the test for inttypes imaxabs method.
>> > + * This is the test for inttypes library. It covers these functions :
>> > + * imaxabs(), imaxdiv(), strtoimax(), strtoumax(), wcstoimax(),
>> > wcstoumax().
>> > */
>> >
>> > #ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H
>> > @@ -11,8 +12,6 @@
>> > #include
>> > #include
>> > #include
>> > -#include
>> > -#include
>> > #include
>> > #include
>> >
>> > @@ -32,11 +31,63 @@ rtems_task Init(
>> > {
>> >rtems_print_printer_printf(&rtems_test_printer);
>> >rtems_test_begin();
>> > -
>> > - intmax_t a = -1234;
>> >
>> > - intmax_t b = imaxabs(a);
>> > - printf( "imaxabs_value = %jd\n", b);
>> > + char* endptr, *nptr;
>> > +
>> > + uintmax_t j, k;
>> > +
>> > + int base = 10;
>> > + rtems_test_assert (base == EINVAL);
>> I don't know why this is being asserted.
>>
>> > +
>> > + wchar_t *nptr1, *endptr1;
>> > +
>> > + intmax_t m, n;
>> > +
>> > + nptr1 = L"10110134932";
>> > + nptr = "20690239864abc";
>> > +
>> > + /* Test for wcstoimax */
>> > +
>> > + m = wcstoimax(nptr1, &endptr1, base);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (m == ERANGE);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (m == EINVAL);
>> > +
>> I don't understand these two asserts, Perhaps you meant to check errno?
>>
>> Is it possible to check the correctness of the return value 'm' in an
>> rtems_test_assert() to automate verification of the return?
>>
>
> I don't see how both of those assert's would ever pass. m cannot
> equal both those values. Is it "m == ERANGE || m == EINVAL"?
> Don't we know the single error case it is trying to exercise?
>
>>
>> These same comments apply to the other tests below.
>>
>> You should also add some other boundary condition tests, e.g., NULL
>> endptr, base != 10, and some invalid cases too.
>>
>> > + printf( "wcstoimax = %jd\n", m );
>> > +
>> > + /* test for strtoumax */
>> > +
>> > + j = strtoumax (nptr, &endptr, base);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (j == ERANGE);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (j == EINVAL);
>> > +
>> > + printf( "strtoumax = %ju ( base %d )\n", j, base );
>> > + printf( "Stopped scan at %s\n\n", endptr );
>> > +
>> > + /*test for wcstoumax */
>> > +
>> > + k = wcstoumax (nptr1, &endptr1, base);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (k == ERANGE);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (k == EINVAL);
>> > +
>> > + printf( "wcstoumax = %ju\n", k );
>> > +
>> > + /*Test for imaxdiv */
>> > +
>> > + imaxdiv_t retrival = imaxdiv ( 27, 4 );
>> > + printf( "imax div value = %jd\n", retrival.rem );
>> > +
>> > + /*Test for imaxabs */
>> > +
>> > + printf( "imaxabs_value = %jd\n", imaxabs (-1234));
>> > +
>> > + /*Test for strtoimax */
>> > +
>> > + n = strtoimax ("", &endptr, 2);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (n == ERANGE);
>> > + rtems_test_assert (n == EINVAL);
>> > +
>> > + printf( "strtoimax value = %jd\n", n);
>> > +
>> >
>> >rte
