lidavidm commented on code in PR #162:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/pull/162#discussion_r1140506306
##########
extensions/nanoarrow_ipc/src/nanoarrow/nanoarrow_ipc_test.cc:
##########
@@ -44,6 +49,18 @@ struct ArrowIpcDecoderPrivate {
};
}
+static enum ArrowIpcEndianness ArrowIpcSystemEndianness(void) {
+ uint32_t check = 1;
+ char first_byte;
+ enum ArrowIpcEndianness system_endianness;
Review Comment:
unused?
##########
extensions/nanoarrow_ipc/src/nanoarrow/nanoarrow_ipc_test.cc:
##########
@@ -272,9 +297,16 @@ TEST(NanoarrowIpcTest,
NanoarrowIpcDecodeSimpleRecordBatch) {
ASSERT_EQ(array.children[0]->length, 3);
EXPECT_EQ(array.children[0]->null_count, 0);
const int32_t* out = reinterpret_cast<const
int32_t*>(array.children[0]->buffers[1]);
- EXPECT_EQ(out[0], 1);
- EXPECT_EQ(out[1], 2);
- EXPECT_EQ(out[2], 3);
+
+ if (ArrowIpcSystemEndianness() == NANOARROW_IPC_ENDIANNESS_LITTLE) {
+ EXPECT_EQ(out[0], 1);
+ EXPECT_EQ(out[1], 2);
+ EXPECT_EQ(out[2], 3);
+ } else {
+ EXPECT_EQ(out[0], bswap32(1));
Review Comment:
Hmm, because the hardcoded data is in little-endian?
Wonder if it would instead make sense to compare byte slices directly
instead of int32_t values then
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
