Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] t: move reftable/readwrite_test.c to the unit testing framework

On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 03:33:04PM -0700, Josh Steadmon wrote:

On 2024.08.13 20:04, Chandra Pratap wrote:

quoted

reftable/readwrite_test.c exercises the functions defined in
reftable/reader.{c,h} and reftable/writer.{c,h}. Migrate
reftable/readwrite_test.c to the unit testing framework. Migration
involves refactoring the tests to use the unit testing framework
instead of reftable's test framework and renaming the tests to
align with unit-tests' naming conventions.

Since some tests in reftable/readwrite_test.c use the functions
set_test_hash(), noop_flush() and strbuf_add_void() defined in
reftable/test_framework.{c,h} but these files are not #included
in the ported unit test, copy these functions in the new test file.

I'm assuming that eventually, reftable/test_framework (and all the rest
of reftable/libreftable_test.a) will be removed after all the tests are
converted to the unit test framework, is that correct? Will other tests
need these test_framework functions? If so, I'd rather not end up with
duplicates in each test file, even if these are small functions. Is
there a reason why we can't link the reftable/test_framework object (or
the whole reftable/libreftable_test.a library)?

The reason is likely that they use different infra, e.g. `EXPECT()` vs
`check()`. So instead of linking `libreftable_test.a`, I think it is
fine to duplicate the functionality in `t/unit-tests`. In not too
distant of a future we're going to get rid of everything in the reftable
tests anyway, including the `libreftable_test.a` library. So avoiding
the duplication doesn't make a ton of sense to me.

That being said, I think we should not duplicate functionality in
`t/unit-tests`. So if there is functionality used by multiple tests, we
should likely move it into a new `t/unit-tests/lib-reftable.c` file.

Patrick