On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:46:54AM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
> On 5/11/2011 9:51 AM, jor...@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: jorton
> > Date: Wed May 11 14:51:33 2011
> > New Revision: 1101905
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1101905&view=rev
> > Log:
> > * test/testfnmatch.c: Add a few more apr_fnmatch() tests to
> > improve (already good!) coverage a little.
> > (test_fnmatch_test): New test.
>
> Thanks for your work on this, Joe!
'tas but a trifle - thanks to *you* for slogging through this one, it
looked like a tough nut to crack.
> Note that I've been careful in prior tests to strike both match and
> notmatch at the start, middle, end and beyond end of the string tested
> (Jeff had tripped over one such edge case), and it's probably worth
> repeating that exercise with these regex patterns. Unfortunately I've
> been exhausted of cycles to take this any further, so it's great to
> see others add on to the cases.
OK, I will revisit that if I get a chance. I just wanted to make sure
some of the more obscure branches were getting tested; gcov says this
with the current code which is pretty good:
File 'strings/apr_fnmatch.c'
Lines executed:91.48% of 176
Branches executed:95.40% of 261
Taken at least once:81.61% of 261
Calls executed:100.00% of 17
I had one question actually, if you have a spare moment ever, there was
a branch I could not work out how to trigger in fnmatch_ch():
if (**pattern == '[')
{
++*pattern;
...
while (**pattern)
{
/* ']' is an ordinary character at the start of the range pattern */
if ((**pattern == ']') && (*pattern > mismatch)) {
That last expression (*pattern > mismatch) looks like it should always
evaluate to true; I could not work out why that test should be necessary.
When evaluating that line:
a) mismatch always points to the first char in the *pattern on entry to the fn
b) *pattern must have been incremented at least once since entry
c) therefore, *pattern > mismatch must always be true
Regards, Joe
