Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> writes:
> Add two new macros to support other types of QNums:
> QLIT_QNUM_UINT, and QLIT_QNUM_DOUBLE, and include them
> in the qlit_equal_qobject_test() test case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com>
> ---
> Changes v2 -> v3:
> * QLIT_QNUM macro doesn't exist anymore
> * Addition of the QNumValue field to QLitObject is
> now in a separate patch ("qlit: Use QNumValue to represent QNums")
> * check-qjson test case changes dropped.
> Instead, I'm only extending the qlit_equal_qobject_test() test
> case.
>
> Changes v1 -> v2:
> * Coding style fix at qlit_equal_qobject()
> ---
> include/qapi/qmp/qlit.h | 4 ++++
> tests/check-qlit.c | 5 +++++
> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/qapi/qmp/qlit.h b/include/qapi/qmp/qlit.h
> index a240cdd299..a2881b7f42 100644
> --- a/include/qapi/qmp/qlit.h
> +++ b/include/qapi/qmp/qlit.h
> @@ -42,6 +42,10 @@ struct QLitDictEntry {
> { .type = QTYPE_QBOOL, .value.qbool = (val) }
> #define QLIT_QNUM_INT(val) \
> { .type = QTYPE_QNUM, .value.qnum = QNUM_VAL_INT(val) }
> +#define QLIT_QNUM_UINT(val) \
> + { .type = QTYPE_QNUM, .value.qnum = QNUM_VAL_UINT(val) }
> +#define QLIT_QNUM_DOUBLE(val) \
> + { .type = QTYPE_QNUM, .value.qnum = QNUM_VAL_DOUBLE(val) }
> #define QLIT_QSTR(val) \
> { .type = QTYPE_QSTRING, .value.qstr = (val) }
> #define QLIT_QDICT(val) \
> diff --git a/tests/check-qlit.c b/tests/check-qlit.c
> index 5a9260b93f..31e90f8965 100644
> --- a/tests/check-qlit.c
> +++ b/tests/check-qlit.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,11 @@ static void qlit_equal_qobject_test(void)
> QLIT_QNUM_INT(1),
> QLIT_QNUM_INT(INT64_MIN),
> QLIT_QNUM_INT(INT64_MAX),
> + QLIT_QNUM_UINT(UINT64_MAX),
> + /* Larger than UINT64_MAX: */
> + QLIT_QNUM_DOUBLE(18446744073709552e3),
> + /* Smaller than INT64_MIN: */
> + QLIT_QNUM_DOUBLE(-92233720368547758e2),
Why "larger than UINT64_MAX" and "smaller than INT64_MIN"?
> QLIT_QSTR(""),
> QLIT_QSTR("foo"),
> qlit,
