Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 5/9] test-string-input-visitor: Add more tests

[Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>]

Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> writes:

> On 11/20/18 11:20 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 11/20/18 11:06 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>>> On 11/20/18 3:25 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> Test that very big/small values are not accepted and that ranges with
>>>> only one element work. Also test that ranges are ascending and cannot
>>>> have more than 65536 elements.
>>>>
>>>> Rename expect4 to expect5, as we will be moving that to a separate ulist
>>>> test after the rework.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   tests/test-string-input-visitor.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
>>
>> Do we also want to test garbage strings like:
>>
>> "1-" (incomplete range)
>> "1X-2" (garbage suffix on first element)
>> "1-2X" (garbage suffix on second element)
>>
>> and/or
>>
>> "-2--1" (valid range of signed integers)
>> "-1--2" (questionable whether this is valid for the two largest
>> unsigned integers)
>
> Or even " 1- 2" (we permit leading whitespace for plain integers - do
> we also permit it in both sides of a range)?  Also, if we permit
> whitespace after the range '-', should we permit it beforehand?

For what it's worth, the tests for integers (as opposed to ranges)
aren't that thorough, either.  test-cutils.c already provides cover for
them, but not for ranges.

> These sorts of questions may be fine in followup patches.

David is doing me a favor with these patches.  The tests feel good
enough, I don't want to hold these patches hostage to extort more.

Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>