On Jan 21, 2008 6:25 PM, Detlef Riekenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mo, 2008-01-21 at 16:33 +0100, Hans Leidekker wrote: > > > > +static void test_GetICMProfileA( HDC dc ) > > Please check GetLastError() as much as possible > (Add comments, when GetLastError() does not return something usable > > > > + size = MAX_PATH; > > + ret = GetICMProfileA( dc, &size, NULL ); > > + ok( !ret, "GetICMProfileA succeeded\n" ); > > This is different from GetICMProfileW and MSDN. > Please add a comment. > > > + size = 0; > > + SetLastError(0xdeadbeef); > > + ret = GetICMProfileA( dc, &size, filename ); > > + error = GetLastError(); > > + ok( !ret, "GetICMProfileA succeeded\n" ); > > + ok( size, "expected size > 0\n" ); > > + ok( error == ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER, "got %d, expected > > ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER\n", error ); > > what are the advantages compared to one test for all? >
So that you can see exactly what part is not conforming to the expected value. > ok ( !ret && (GetLastError() == ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER) && > (size > 0), > "got %u with %u and size %d (expected '0' with " > "ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER and '> 0'\n", > ret, GetLastError(), size); > This is very poor form for unit tests. The key word is 'unit', meaning one. How can you read anything in that mess? -- James Hawkins
