Re: [PATCH] Port helper/test-ctype.c to unit-tests/t-ctype.c

["René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>]

Am 27.12.23 um 11:57 schrieb Christian Couder:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 7:46 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> Achu Luma <ach.lumap@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> +/* Macro to test a character type */
>>> +#define TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(func, string)                        \
>>> +static void test_ctype_##func(void)                          \
>>> +{                                                            \
>>> +     int i;                                                  \
>>> +     for (i = 0; i < 256; i++)                               \
>>> +             check_int(func(i), ==, is_in(string, i));       \
>>> +}
>>
>> Now, we let check_int() to do the checking for each and every byte
>> value for the class.  check_int() uses different reporting and shows
>> the problematic value in a way that is more verbose and at the same
>> time is a less specific and harder to understand:
>>
>>                 test_msg("   left: %"PRIdMAX, a);
>>                 test_msg("  right: %"PRIdMAX, b);
>>
>> But that is probably the price to pay to use a more generic
>> framework, I guess.
>
> I have added Phillip and Josh in Cc: as they might have ideas about this.

You can write custom messages for custom tests using test_assert().

> Also it might not be a big issue here, but when the new unit test
> framework was proposed, I commented on the fact that "left" and
> "right" were perhaps a bit less explicit than "actual" and "expected".

True.

>>> +int cmd_main(int argc, const char **argv) {
>>> +     /* Run all character type tests */
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isspace(), "isspace() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isdigit(), "isdigit() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isalpha(), "isalpha() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isalnum(), "isalnum() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_is_glob_special(), "is_glob_special() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_is_regex_special(), "is_regex_special() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_is_pathspec_magic(), "is_pathspec_magic() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isascii(), "isascii() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_islower(), "islower() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isupper(), "isupper() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_iscntrl(), "iscntrl() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_ispunct(), "ispunct() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isxdigit(), "isxdigit() works as we expect");
>>> +     TEST(test_ctype_isprint(), "isprint() works as we expect");
>>> +
>>> +     return test_done();
>>> +}
>>
>> As a practice to use the unit-tests framework, the patch looks OK.

The added repetition is a bit grating.  With a bit of setup, loop
unrolling and stringification you can retain the property of only having
to mention the class name once.  Demo patch below.

>> helper/test-ctype.c indeed is an oddball that runs once and checks
>> everything it wants to check, for which the unit tests framework is
>> much more suited.
>
> Yeah, I agree.

Indeed: test-ctype does unit tests, so the unit test framework should
be a perfect fit.  It still feels a bit raw that this point, though,
but that's to be expected.

René


diff --git a/t/unit-tests/t-ctype.c b/t/unit-tests/t-ctype.c
index 41189ba9f9..7903856cec 100644
--- a/t/unit-tests/t-ctype.c
+++ b/t/unit-tests/t-ctype.c
@@ -13,13 +13,23 @@ static int is_in(const char *s, int ch)
 	return !!strchr(s, ch);
 }

-/* Macro to test a character type */
-#define TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(func, string)			\
-static void test_ctype_##func(void)				\
-{								\
-	int i;                                     	 	\
-	for (i = 0; i < 256; i++)                 		\
-		check_int(func(i), ==, is_in(string, i)); 	\
+struct ctype {
+	const char *name;
+	const char *expect;
+	int actual[256];
+};
+
+static void test_ctype(const struct ctype *class)
+{
+	for (int i = 0; i < 256; i++) {
+		int expect = is_in(class->expect, i);
+		int actual = class->actual[i];
+		int res = test_assert(TEST_LOCATION(), class->name,
+				      actual == expect);
+		if (!res)
+			test_msg("%s classifies char %d (0x%02x) wrongly",
+				 class->name, i, i);
+	}
 }

 #define DIGIT "0123456789"
@@ -40,37 +50,39 @@ static void test_ctype_##func(void)				\
 	"\x10\x11\x12\x13\x14\x15\x16\x17\x18\x19\x1a\x1b\x1c\x1d\x1e\x1f" \
 	"\x7f"

-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isdigit, DIGIT)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isspace, " \n\r\t")
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isalpha, LOWER UPPER)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isalnum, LOWER UPPER DIGIT)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(is_glob_special, "*?[\\")
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(is_regex_special, "$()*+.?[\\^{|")
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(is_pathspec_magic, "!\"#%&',-/:;<=>@_`~")
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isascii, ASCII)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(islower, LOWER)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isupper, UPPER)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(iscntrl, CNTRL)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(ispunct, PUNCT)
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isxdigit, DIGIT "abcdefABCDEF")
-TEST_CTYPE_FUNC(isprint, LOWER UPPER DIGIT PUNCT " ")
+#define APPLY16(f, n) \
+	f(n + 0x0), f(n + 0x1), f(n + 0x2), f(n + 0x3), \
+	f(n + 0x4), f(n + 0x5), f(n + 0x6), f(n + 0x7), \
+	f(n + 0x8), f(n + 0x9), f(n + 0xa), f(n + 0xb), \
+	f(n + 0xc), f(n + 0xd), f(n + 0xe), f(n + 0xf)
+#define APPLY256(f) \
+	APPLY16(f, 0x00), APPLY16(f, 0x10), APPLY16(f, 0x20), APPLY16(f, 0x30),\
+	APPLY16(f, 0x40), APPLY16(f, 0x50), APPLY16(f, 0x60), APPLY16(f, 0x70),\
+	APPLY16(f, 0x80), APPLY16(f, 0x90), APPLY16(f, 0xa0), APPLY16(f, 0xb0),\
+	APPLY16(f, 0xc0), APPLY16(f, 0xd0), APPLY16(f, 0xe0), APPLY16(f, 0xf0),\
+
+#define CTYPE(name, expect) { #name, expect, { APPLY256(name) }  }

 int cmd_main(int argc, const char **argv) {
+	struct ctype classes[] = {
+		CTYPE(isdigit, DIGIT),
+		CTYPE(isspace, " \n\r\t"),
+		CTYPE(isalpha, LOWER UPPER),
+		CTYPE(isalnum, LOWER UPPER DIGIT),
+		CTYPE(is_glob_special, "*?[\\"),
+		CTYPE(is_regex_special, "$()*+.?[\\^{|"),
+		CTYPE(is_pathspec_magic, "!\"#%&',-/:;<=>@_`~"),
+		CTYPE(isascii, ASCII),
+		CTYPE(islower, LOWER),
+		CTYPE(isupper, UPPER),
+		CTYPE(iscntrl, CNTRL),
+		CTYPE(ispunct, PUNCT),
+		CTYPE(isxdigit, DIGIT "abcdefABCDEF"),
+		CTYPE(isprint, LOWER UPPER DIGIT PUNCT " "),
+	};
 	/* Run all character type tests */
-	TEST(test_ctype_isspace(), "isspace() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_isdigit(), "isdigit() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_isalpha(), "isalpha() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_isalnum(), "isalnum() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_is_glob_special(), "is_glob_special() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_is_regex_special(), "is_regex_special() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_is_pathspec_magic(), "is_pathspec_magic() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_isascii(), "isascii() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_islower(), "islower() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_isupper(), "isupper() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_iscntrl(), "iscntrl() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_ispunct(), "ispunct() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_isxdigit(), "isxdigit() works as we expect");
-	TEST(test_ctype_isprint(), "isprint() works as we expect");
+	for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(classes); i++)
+		TEST(test_ctype(&classes[i]), "%s works", classes[i].name);

 	return test_done();
 }