Bram Moolenaar <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ben Fritz wrote: > >> So, is the intent to eventually replace *all* memory allocations with >> this no allow testing error handling code? Or just specific areas? >> Example, I don't see testing of the error handling in the garbage >> collector. > > That would be a lot of work. At least this helps someone who wants to > get 100% coverage for some part of the code. > >> Wouldn't it be better to use an enum rather than a comment about the >> current max ID? Much easier to search that way and less error-prone. > > It would require an enum with fixed numbers. Otherwise removing an > entry would break tests, since those will need to use numbers. > Might as well just use the number. It doesn't matter if there are gaps. > If the same number is used twice there is no error, but the test might > fail. Or it might just work.
SQLite is tested with 100% coverage, including error paths with dynamic allocation failure (OOM), I/O errors, etc. Some information can be found here: https://www.sqlite.org/malloc.html https://www.sqlite.org/testing.html But probably this is overkill for Vim. Perhaps something easier is to inject, for test purpose, some random allocation failures and test with asan. Regards Dominique -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
