Subject: Re: [PATCH] test-ctype: check EOF

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2023 08:23:17 -0700

René Scharfe <[email-masked]> writes:

> The character classifiers are supposed to handle EOF, a negative integer
> value.  It isn't part of any character class.  Extend the ctype tests to
> cover it.

The goal makes sense.

> -static void report_error(const char *class, int ch)
> +static void test(int ch, const char *class, int expect, int actual)
>  {
> +	if (actual == expect)
> +		return;
>  	printf("%s classifies char %d (0x%02x) wrongly\n", class, ch, ch);
>  	rc = 1;
>  }
> @@ -24,9 +26,9 @@ static int is_in(const char *s, int ch)
>  #define TEST_CLASS(t,s) {			\
>  	int i;					\
>  	for (i = 0; i < 256; i++) {		\
> -		if (is_in(s, i) != t(i))	\
> -			report_error(#t, i);	\
> +		test(i, #t, is_in(s, i), t(i));	\
>  	}					\
> +	test(EOF, #t, 0, t(EOF));		\
>  }
>
>  #define DIGIT "0123456789"
> --
> 2.40.1

I am a bit torn on the conversion from report_error() to test(), as
the only "test"-y thing the updated function does is to compare two
of its parameters.  It still is mostly about reporting an error when
something goes wrong.  In other words, the added change could have
been just

	if (t(EOF) != 0)
		report_error(#t, EOF);

after the loop, I think.

The only thing that I am not entirely happy with the end result is
the name of the function, and not how the caller and the callee
divides their work, so it is so miniscule a thing that it won't be
worth our collective time to bikeshed it further.

Let's take it as-is.  Thanks.