On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 04:37:37PM -0400, rsbecker@nexbridge.com wrote:

On Wednesday, July 31, 2024 4:25 PM, I wrote:

quoted

On Wednesday, July 31, 2024 12:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

[off-list ref] writes:

quoted

I'm sorry for being so behind the curve... what is clar and where does it run?

We have t/unit-test/test-lib.[ch] that are our home-grown unit test
framework.  A handful of tests have been written to use it, when you
say "make test", or "(cd t && make)", unit tests binaries linked with the home-

grown unit test framework run.

quoted

clar is a _potential_ replacement for our home-grown framework,
suggested here because it would be nicer if we can use off-the-shelf
component instead of having to enhance and maintain our own.

Where and how it runs does not change even after clar turns out to be
good enough for our purpose and we commit to replace our home-grown
unit test framework with it.

Well... I would like to be able to see whether this can be built/used on NonStop just
so I can stay ahead of the curve or be far enough in advance of it to request any
required fixes to make it work on platform.

After checking out clar, I would say it has potential, but needs to be slightly more
portable to depend on more than gcc CFLAGS (specifically -Wall). I will ask that
of that team. It does look like it might be possible, but it should integrate with the
config.mak.uname settings, so c99 or c11 (or soon c17) could be used with other
CFLAGS from that file so maintainers only have to worry about one location.

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying. We don't use the Makefile of
clar at all but integrate it into our own build system, so honoring
config.mak.uname should come for free, I think.

In any case, if there are C constructs in clar that do not work right
now, then I'd be happy to address those issues. The clar is overall
quite small, so it shouldn't be all that involved.

Patrick