On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Joe Mistachkin <sql...@mistachkin.com> wrote:
> > Scott Robison wrote: > > > > So my expectation that it would automatically update the utf.test file is > > incorrect? I'm supposed to manually integrate that file back to utf.test? > > > > Yes and yes. > > > > > If I want to specify a new test that should fail but does not currently, > > am I just supposed to manually tweak the desired expected output of > > utf-check.txt before integration? That's how it is looking to me at the > > moment. > > > > Yes. > Okay, thanks for all the help. I've committed some new test cases that demonstrate errors in the trunk invalid_utf8. 16 tests fail on trunk, none fail on invalid_utf8_table branch (which of course doesn't mean there aren't bugs, just that the sample data doesn't exercise a buggy path, or that I did something wrong in adding the tests). I've updated the invalid_utf8_table branch with performance optimizations. Profiling the two versions (tip of both trunk & branch), on my machine with my test data (all possible byte combinations up to 4 bytes in length) says that mine is now faster. I show the tip of trunk version used about 130 billion cpu cycles vs 112 for the branch version. HA! ;) But seriously, take a look at the new test cases. Let me know whether you want to tweak your function or want me to merge mine to trunk. -- Scott Robison
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
