Re: expressive test macros (was: Report test_atomic_ops() failures consistently, via macros)

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: expressive test macros (was: Report test_atomic_ops() failures consistently, via macros)
Date: 2019-10-09 15:47:27
Message-ID: 4d0e55f4-6a2f-b143-9ed2-157877051ba8@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On 2019-10-08 06:59, Noah Misch wrote:
>> Btw., JUnit uses the ordering convention assertEquals(expected, actual),
>> whereas Perl Test::More uses is(actual, expected). Let's make sure we
>> pick something and stick with it.
> Since we write "if (actual == expected)", I prefer f(actual, expected). CUnit
> uses CU_ASSERT_EQUAL(actual, expected).

Yes, that seems to be the dominating order outside of JUnit.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2019-10-09 19:18:04 pgsql: Use libc version as a collation version on glibc systems.
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2019-10-09 13:37:34 Re: pgsql: Remove pqsignal() from libpq's official exports list.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2019-10-09 16:09:30 Re: Global shared meta cache
Previous Message Kohei KaiGai 2019-10-09 15:16:03 Re: How to retain lesser paths at add_path()?