Snaipe/Criterion

A KISS, non-intrusive cross-platform C unit testing framework

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

and yeah, 2nd memleak has been fixed on bleeding

Dominik

@kaidowei

ah okay. But I guess we will not switch to bleeding :D

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

yeah, not yet though

I'll cherry pick the fix on the patch branch

Dominik

@kaidowei

thanks

plans for 2.2.1?

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

2.2.1 will be released this saturday if everything goes right

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

@kaidowei I experimented a bit more with the 1rst API draft and came up with this: http://pastebin.com/raw/dkCKD4YY

This possible 2nd draft should be more adequate than the first for mocking

(the syntax is inspired by mockito)

I haven't got the time to really make a full implementation, but it seems to be possible from the few tests I ran

I am also hesitating on the syntax of mmk_when

there's

mmk_when (malloc, m,
            .with_size = mmk_eq(size_t, sizeof (ref)),
            .then_return = buf);

of course, but

mmk_when (m, malloc(sizeof (ref)), .then_return = buf);

seems really attractive

The biggest obstacle against syntax 2 are sequence points

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

but I think I might be able to bypass it with some macro magic and __COUNTER__.

this also opens the door to over the top control over parameter conditions

because then you could have easily something like:

mmk_when (m, foo(1, mmk_lt(0), mmk_arg_that(is_valid)), .then_return = 42);

and specify whatever matcher you want

Dominik

@kaidowei

hi
just to be clear: mmk_when adds a call and verify checks, if that call was made?

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

mmk_when binds a combination of parameters to a return value, mmk_verify checks whenever a function was called or not

Dominik

@kaidowei

so when I have a function that calls my mock 10 times, I have to write mmk_verify 10 times?

can't you verify in the stub?

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

@kaidowei you would do mmk_verify(..., .times = 10)

mmk_verify lets you check the number of times a function has been called based on predicates

Dominik

@kaidowei

okay, I see. But why do I have to pass the same information again? Cant the mock do that work?

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

What do you mean by same information?

Are you talking about mmk_when vs mmk_verify?

Dominik

@kaidowei

yes. mmk_when tells the mock how often and how it will be called;
mmk_verify should only check whether the mock really was called that way

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

Actually, it's a bit more subtle than that. mmk_when defines the behaviour of the mock regardless of the number of times the stub is called. If you define foo(1) to return 1, then it will always do so.

mmk_verify asserts that at some point the function has been called with matching parameters a certain number of times

Both are complementary but not necessary to each other

If you want to test what happens when a function returns a specific value, you use mmk_when (i.e. you tell a function to do things)

If you want to test how the function has been used (i.e. you ask the function if it has been called the way you want), then you use mmk_verify

You can completely use mmk_verify without mmk_when, and mmk_verify without mmk_when (useful when you don't care about return values)

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

Er, I meant mmk_when without mmk_verify

Dominik

@kaidowei

okay, I understand. powerful, but (at first glance) quite confusing

what does mmk_eq do?

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

mmk_eq ought to dissappear, I've since found a better way to express it

Dominik

@kaidowei

ah, good

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

but in theory it's a matcher that fixes a parameter to the specific value

in my new batch of tests, it's simply .with_foo = 42 instead of .with_foo = mmk_eq(type, 42)

there are other matchers though

like mmk_any(type), which produces a dummy value matching any parameter

or mmk_lt(type, val), which produces a dummy value matching any parameter less than val

Dominik

@kaidowei

cool :)

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

btw, I'm surveying from a group of programmer friends what syntax they prefer between the two mentionned above, if you'd like to weigh in your syntactic preferences: http://goo.gl/forms/7CEBv3vvxT

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

@kaidowei it seems I can't reproduce the 2nd leak you reported on 2.2.0, does it still happen on your end?

(the one created by test_stats_init)

Franklin Mathieu

@Snaipe

acually, a better question would be: where does it happen on your end

Farid Mesnata

@lamrii

Hi all, I currently learning C, and I'm doing some algorithm problem to progress. I would like to use a Criterion, but I dont understand how to install it. Can you help me. Thanks

Where communities thrive

People

Repo info

Activity