On Donnerstag, 8. Oktober 2020 14:37:00 CEST Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/10/20 18:15, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> > -int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > +int main(int argc, char **argv, char** envp)
> >
> > {
> >
> > g_test_init(&argc, &argv, NULL);
> >
> > + if (g_test_verbose()) {
> > + printf("ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES: {\n");
> > + for (char **env = envp; *env != 0; env++) {
> > + printf("\t%s\n", *env);
> > + }
> > + printf("}\n");
> > + }
>
> But doesn't this (and patch 6 as well) break TAP output? Using
> g_test_message + g_test_verbose would be the best of both worlds.
If there was TAP output then yes, patches 4, 5, 6 would probably break it.
How/when is TAP output enabled? I don't see any TAP output by default.
> In fact using printf in tests should be forbidden, since glib 2.62 and
> newer _always_ emit TAP.
>
> Paolo
The reason why I used printf() was because g_test_message() clutters the
output tremendously, as it always wraps the text of each g_test_message() call
into:
"(MSG: %s)\n"
which is inappropriate for multi-line messages as these proposed patches do.
Is that actually a real-life problem? I mean these patches only output
anything if --verbose CL switch is used, and I don't see any TAP output
enabled by default. And the --verbose CL switch is usually just used by
developers for debugging test case issues, isn't it?
Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck
