> On July 11, 2014, 1:43 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
> > /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_core_format.c, lines 
> > 61-66
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3734/diff/4/?file=62711#file62711line61>
> >
> >     Do we really want doxygen tags on unit tests?

Yes!

(1) It's generally harmless.
(2) Tests can be just as complex as 'regular' code. In this particular case, 
I'm implementing a format attribute module inside the test; that probably 
warrants some documentation
(3) When tests do fail, it can be incredibly challenging to understand why they 
failed without adequate documentation regarding what they do

While I would never be as stringent about doxygen documentation for unit tests 
- they are unit tests, and are not an API to be consumed by other developers - 
I find that going back to a unit test written a year ago that has reasonable 
documentation is much nicer than not. Exhibit A: test_taskprocessor vs 
test_poll.


> On July 11, 2014, 1:43 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
> > /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_core_format.c, line 125
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3734/diff/4/?file=62711#file62711line125>
> >
> >     Not a big deal since this is a unit test, but why not replace with 'if 
> > (pvt1 == pvt2)'?  If the pointer is the same the formats are equal.

Fixed.


> On July 11, 2014, 1:43 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
> > /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_format_cap.c, line 359
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3734/diff/4/?file=62713#file62713line359>
> >
> >     Can we make this mention that the codec id is already in the caps?  
> > Since this string should not print it is mostly for documentation.  This 
> > way it's clearer from here why the cap_count should still be 1.

"Adding of duplicate format to capabilities structure failed"
"Adding of duplicate named format to capabilities structure failed"


> On July 11, 2014, 1:43 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
> > /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_format_cap.c, line 478
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3734/diff/4/?file=62713#file62713line478>
> >
> >     Should we also test that the counts from original dst_caps + src_caps 
> > == count?

Added:
        ast_test_validate(test, ast_format_cap_count(dst_caps) == 
ast_format_cap_count(src_caps));


- Matt


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3734/#review12554
-----------------------------------------------------------


On July 10, 2014, 11:11 a.m., Matt Jordan wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3734/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 10, 2014, 11:11 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Repository: Asterisk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This patch does two things:
> 
> * It updates a few of the unit tests for some of the API changes. In 
> particular, it focuses on adding some tests for formats with attributes and 
> their expected behaviour. A few other non-format related unit tests were 
> updated as well to handle off nominals detected during testing.
> 
> * It adds an 'ast_format_none' format. This format is a dummy format that can 
> be used instead of a NULL pointer to prevent having to put NULL dereference 
> checks into every place in the codebase. Channels are no assigned this format 
> immediately upon creation, and their default capabilities are set to have it. 
> As this format's codec has no translation (nor a representation in the RTP 
> engine), it _shouldn't_ cause harm.
> 
> * A few NULL checks were put in anyway into key areas in a few modules. These 
> were ones that were hit hard by the unit tests and prone to crashing if 
> presented a NULL format.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_format_cap.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_format_cache.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_core_format.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/tests/test_cel.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/main/format_cap.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/main/format_cache.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/main/codec_builtin.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/main/codec.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/main/channel.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/main/bridge_channel.c 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/include/asterisk/format_cache.h 
> 418325 
>   /team/group/media_formats-reviewed-trunk/include/asterisk/codec.h 418325 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3734/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Unit tests pass.
> 
> There is a FRACK on shutdown, but it doesn't appear to be caused by this 
> patch (things didn't run long enough without this patch before)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Matt Jordan
> 
>

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Reply via email to