Travis Vitek wrote:
Martin Sebor wrote:
+#define countof(x) (sizeof (x) / sizeof (*x))
Since you seem to like it so much ;-) we might as well move this
macro to some central test suite header (and rename it according
to the naming convention).
I'd love to, provided that we can define the n
Martin Sebor wrote:
>
>>
>> +#define countof(x) (sizeof (x) / sizeof (*x))
>
>Since you seem to like it so much ;-) we might as well move this
>macro to some central test suite header (and rename it according
>to the naming convention).
>
I'd love to, provided that we can define the naming con
Travis Vitek wrote:
[...]
+TEST_N (data.bool_, bool, data.value_ != 0);
+TEST_N (data.long_, long, data.value_);
+TEST_N (data.ulong_, unsigned long, data.value_);
I note you've changed the test from invoking one num_put member
per iteration to invoking all members each iteration
>Martin Sebor wrote:
>
>Travis Vitek wrote:
>> Attached is a patch to enhance the num_put facet mt test. Threads
>> verify that the values they put compare equal to those put in the
>> primary thread.
>
>There are few outstanding issues here that we need to resolve before
>committing this patch.
Travis Vitek wrote:
Attached is a patch to enhance the num_put facet mt test. Threads
verify that the values they put compare equal to those put in the
primary thread.
There are few outstanding issues here that we need to resolve before
committing this patch...
[...]
@@ -58,150 +64,129 @@
