RE: [Outreachy][PATCH 1/2] date: refactor 64 bit prereq code into reusable functions
From: <hidden>
Date: 2024-02-05 17:34:20
On Monday, February 5, 2024 11:25 AM, Achu Luma wrote:
In a following commit we are going to port code from "t/helper/test-date.c"
and
"t/t0006-date.sh" to a new "t/unit-tests/t-date.c" file using the recently
added unit
test framework. We cannot fully port all the code from "t/helper/test-date.c" though, as
the test-
tool date helper is still used by a number of "t/*.sh" tests. The TIME_IS_64BIT and TIME_T_IS_64BIT prereqs are especially used by
"t5000-
tar-tree.sh", "t5318-commit-graph.sh" and
"t5328-commit-graph-64bit-time.sh"
while checking those prereqs will be required in the new
"t/unit-tests/t-date.c" file
too. To avoid duplicating in both "t/helper/test-date.c" and
"t/unit-tests/t-date.c" the
small amount of code checking these prereqs, let's move it into inline
functions in
"date.h". The names of these new inline functions contain "TIME_IS_64BIT" or "TIME_T_IS_64BIT" as it will simplify the macros we will use when we will
port code
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
to "t/unit-tests/t-date.c" in a following commit. Mentored-by: Christian Couder [off-list ref] Signed-off-by: Achu Luma <redacted> --- date.h | 6 ++++++ t/helper/test-date.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/date.h b/date.h index 6136212a19..fb70490a51 100644 --- a/date.h +++ b/date.h@@ -70,4 +70,10 @@ void datestamp(struct strbuf *out); timestamp_tapproxidate_careful(const char *, int *); int date_overflows(timestamp_t
date);
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
time_t tm_to_time_t(const struct tm *tm); +static inline int check_prereq_TIME_IS_64BIT(void) { + return sizeof(timestamp_t) == 8; +} +static inline int check_prereq_TIME_T_IS_64BIT(void) { + return sizeof(time_t) == 8; +} #endifdiff --git a/t/helper/test-date.c b/t/helper/test-date.c index0683d46574..be0b8679c3 100644--- a/t/helper/test-date.c +++ b/t/helper/test-date.c@@ -126,9 +126,9 @@ int cmd__date(int argc UNUSED, const char **argv)else if (!strcmp(*argv, "getnanos")) getnanos(argv+1); else if (!strcmp(*argv, "is64bit")) - return sizeof(timestamp_t) == 8 ? 0 : 1; + return !check_prereq_TIME_IS_64BIT(); else if (!strcmp(*argv, "time_t-is64bit")) - return sizeof(time_t) == 8 ? 0 : 1; + return !check_prereq_TIME_T_IS_64BIT(); else usage(usage_msg); return 0; -- 2.43.0.windows.1
I would suggest that you also take into account whether time_t is signed or not (more difficult perhaps). Some platforms use signed time_t to allow representation of dates prior to 1970-01-01, while others make this signed. Some other platforms (S/390 for example) have retained time_t as 32-bits but have a time64_t for 64 bits. It might be useful to account for this. --Randall