Seems that we've been forgetting to update this test, leading to
decreased usefulness. Thus lets add a test which walks over the mesa
generated enums and checks the string (if non "0x" prefixed) against the
local table.
Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
---
I'm not 100% sure on the purpose of this test, although without this the
local table can easily bitrot.
Ian can you share your initial goal with this/these test(s). Should we
extend it with this patch, nuke it altogether or else ?
Note: with this in place we get ~400 missing symbols and `make check'
fails.
-Emil
src/mesa/main/tests/enum_strings.cpp | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/mesa/main/tests/enum_strings.cpp
b/src/mesa/main/tests/enum_strings.cpp
index 48b6ec2..6e46851 100644
--- a/src/mesa/main/tests/enum_strings.cpp
+++ b/src/mesa/main/tests/enum_strings.cpp
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ extern "C" {
}
struct enum_info {
- int value;
+ unsigned int value;
const char *name;
};
@@ -43,6 +43,36 @@ TEST(EnumStrings, LookUpByNumber)
}
}
+/*
+ * This test will catch us, when the everything table below hasn't been
+ * updated. Note that this test might take a while since there is no way to
+ * linearly walk the enums.
+ */
+TEST(EnumStrings, InverseLookUpByNumber)
+{
+ const char *mesa_enum, *dummy = "";
+ bool found;
+
+ /* XXX: The 0xFFFF limit looks hacky, but it'll do for now */
+ for (unsigned i = 0; i < 0xFFFF; i++) {
+ mesa_enum = _mesa_enum_to_string(i);
+ found = false;
+
+ if (memcmp(mesa_enum, "0x", 2) != 0) {
+ for (int j = 0; everything[j].name != NULL; j++) {
+ if (i == everything[j].value) {
+ found = true;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (!found)
+ EXPECT_STREQ(mesa_enum, dummy);
+ }
+ }
+}
+
+
TEST(EnumStrings, LookUpUnknownNumber)
{
EXPECT_STRCASEEQ("0xEEEE", _mesa_enum_to_string(0xEEEE));
--
2.6.2
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
