Merge mkindahl@bk-internal.mysql.com:/home/bk/mysql-5.1-new-rpl

into  romeo.(none):/home/bkroot/mysql-5.1-new-rpl

unittest/README.txt

@@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ test won't be executed by 'make test' !
 Documentation
 -------------
 
-There is Doxygen-generated documentation available at:
+The generated documentation is temporarily placed at:
 
-      https://intranet.mysql.com/~mkindahl/mytap/html/
+      http://www.kindahl.net/mytap/doc/
+
+I will move it to a better place once I figure out where and how.

unittest/mytap/Doxyfile

@@ -432,7 +432,7 @@ FILE_PATTERNS          =
 # subdirectories should be searched for input files as well. Possible
 # values are YES and NO.  If left blank NO is used.
 
-RECURSIVE              = YES
+RECURSIVE              = NO
 
 # The EXCLUDE tag can be used to specify files and/or directories that
 # should excluded from the INPUT source files. This way you can easily
@@ -457,14 +457,14 @@ EXCLUDE_PATTERNS       =
 # directories that contain example code fragments that are included (see 
 # the \include command).
 
-EXAMPLE_PATH           = 
+EXAMPLE_PATH           = e
 
 # If the value of the EXAMPLE_PATH tag contains directories, you can use the 
 # EXAMPLE_PATTERNS tag to specify one or more wildcard pattern (like *.cpp 
 # and *.h) to filter out the source-files in the directories. If left 
 # blank all files are included.
 
-EXAMPLE_PATTERNS       = 
+EXAMPLE_PATTERNS       = *.c
 
 # If the EXAMPLE_RECURSIVE tag is set to YES then subdirectories will be 
 # searched for input files to be used with the \include or \dontinclude 
@@ -926,7 +926,7 @@ MACRO_EXPANSION        = YES
 # then the macro expansion is limited to the macros specified with the 
 # PREDEFINED and EXPAND_AS_PREDEFINED tags.
 
-EXPAND_ONLY_PREDEF     = NO
+EXPAND_ONLY_PREDEF     = YES
 
 # If the SEARCH_INCLUDES tag is set to YES (the default) the includes files 
 # in the INCLUDE_PATH (see below) will be search if a #include is found.
@@ -939,33 +939,34 @@ SEARCH_INCLUDES        = YES
 
 INCLUDE_PATH           = 
 
-# You can use the INCLUDE_FILE_PATTERNS tag to specify one or more wildcard 
-# patterns (like *.h and *.hpp) to filter out the header-files in the 
-# directories. If left blank, the patterns specified with FILE_PATTERNS will 
-# be used.
+# You can use the INCLUDE_FILE_PATTERNS tag to specify one or more
+# wildcard patterns (like *.h and *.hpp) to filter out the
+# header-files in the directories. If left blank, the patterns
+# specified with FILE_PATTERNS will be used.
 
 INCLUDE_FILE_PATTERNS  = 
 
-# The PREDEFINED tag can be used to specify one or more macro names that 
-# are defined before the preprocessor is started (similar to the -D option of 
-# gcc). The argument of the tag is a list of macros of the form: name 
-# or name=definition (no spaces). If the definition and the = are 
-# omitted =1 is assumed.
+# The PREDEFINED tag can be used to specify one or more macro names
+# that are defined before the preprocessor is started (similar to the
+# -D option of gcc). The argument of the tag is a list of macros of
+# the form: name or name=definition (no spaces). If the definition and
+# the = are omitted =1 is assumed.
 
 PREDEFINED             = 
 
-# If the MACRO_EXPANSION and EXPAND_ONLY_PREDEF tags are set to YES then 
-# this tag can be used to specify a list of macro names that should be expanded. 
-# The macro definition that is found in the sources will be used. 
-# Use the PREDEFINED tag if you want to use a different macro definition.
+# If the MACRO_EXPANSION and EXPAND_ONLY_PREDEF tags are set to YES
+# then this tag can be used to specify a list of macro names that
+# should be expanded.  The macro definition that is found in the
+# sources will be used.  Use the PREDEFINED tag if you want to use a
+# different macro definition.
 
-EXPAND_AS_DEFINED      = 
+EXPAND_AS_DEFINED      = __attribute__
 
 # If the SKIP_FUNCTION_MACROS tag is set to YES (the default) then
-# doxygen's preprocessor will remove all function-like macros that are alone 
-# on a line, have an all uppercase name, and do not end with a semicolon. Such 
-# function macros are typically used for boiler-plate code, and will confuse the 
-# parser if not removed.
+# doxygen's preprocessor will remove all function-like macros that are
+# alone on a line, have an all uppercase name, and do not end with a
+# semicolon. Such function macros are typically used for boiler-plate
+# code, and will confuse the parser if not removed.
 
 SKIP_FUNCTION_MACROS   = YES
 

unittest/mytap/tap.c

@@ -28,12 +28,18 @@
 #include <string.h>
 #include <signal.h>
 
+/**
+   @defgroup MyTAP_Internal MyTAP Internals
+
+   Internal functions and data structures for the MyTAP implementation.
+*/
+
 /**
    Test data structure.
 
    Data structure containing all information about the test suite.
 
-   @ingroup MyTAP
+   @ingroup MyTAP_Internal
  */
 static TEST_DATA g_test = { 0, 0, 0, "" };
 
@@ -41,6 +47,8 @@ static TEST_DATA g_test = { 0, 0, 0, "" };
    Output stream for test report message.
 
    The macro is just a temporary solution.
+
+   @ingroup MyTAP_Internal
  */
 #define tapout stdout
 
@@ -50,7 +58,7 @@ static TEST_DATA g_test = { 0, 0, 0, "" };
 
   To emit the directive, use the emit_dir() function
 
-  @ingroup MyTAP
+  @ingroup MyTAP_Internal
 
   @see emit_dir
 
@@ -59,7 +67,7 @@ static TEST_DATA g_test = { 0, 0, 0, "" };
   @param ap    Vararg list for the description string above.
  */
 static void
-emit_tap(int pass, char const *fmt, va_list ap)
+vemit_tap(int pass, char const *fmt, va_list ap)
 {
   fprintf(tapout, "%sok %d%s",
           pass ? "" : "not ",
@@ -80,18 +88,22 @@ emit_tap(int pass, char const *fmt, va_list ap)
    not ok 2 # todo some text explaining what remains
    @endcode
 
+   @ingroup MyTAP_Internal
+
    @param dir  Directive as a string
-   @param exp  Explanation string
+   @param why  Explanation string
  */
 static void
-emit_dir(const char *dir, const char *exp)
+emit_dir(const char *dir, const char *why)
 {
-  fprintf(tapout, " # %s %s", dir, exp);
+  fprintf(tapout, " # %s %s", dir, why);
 }
 
 
 /**
    Emit a newline to the TAP output stream.
+
+   @ingroup MyTAP_Internal
  */
 static void
 emit_endl()
@@ -190,7 +202,7 @@ ok(int const pass, char const *fmt, ...)
   if (!pass && *g_test.todo == '\0')
     ++g_test.failed;
 
-  emit_tap(pass, fmt, ap);
+  vemit_tap(pass, fmt, ap);
   va_end(ap);
   if (*g_test.todo != '\0')
     emit_dir("todo", g_test.todo);
@@ -215,7 +227,7 @@ skip(int how_many, char const *const fmt, ...)
   while (how_many-- > 0)
   {
     va_list ap;
-    emit_tap(1, NULL, ap);
+    vemit_tap(1, NULL, ap);
     emit_dir("skip", reason);
     emit_endl();
   }
@@ -308,7 +320,7 @@ int exit_status() {
    @section UnitTest Writing unit tests
 
    The purpose of writing unit tests is to use them to drive component
-   development towards a solution that the tests.  This means that the
+   development towards a solution that passes the tests.  This means that the
    unit tests has to be as complete as possible, testing at least:
 
    - Normal input
@@ -317,29 +329,240 @@ int exit_status() {
    - Error handling
    - Bad environment
 
-   We will go over each case and explain it in more detail.
+   @subsection NormalSubSec Normal input
+
+   This is to test that the component have the expected behaviour.
+   This is just plain simple: test that it works.  For example, test
+   that you can unpack what you packed, adding gives the sum, pincing
+   the duck makes it quack.
+
+   This is what everybody does when they write tests.
+
+
+   @subsection BorderlineTests Borderline cases
+
+   If you have a size anywhere for your component, does it work for
+   size 1? Size 0? Sizes close to <code>UINT_MAX</code>?
+
+   It might not be sensible to have a size 0, so in this case it is
+   not a borderline case, but rather a faulty input (see @ref
+   FaultyInputTests).
+
+
+   @subsection FaultyInputTests Faulty input
+
+   Does your bitmap handle 0 bits size? Well, it might not be designed
+   for it, but is should <em>not</em> crash the application, but
+   rather produce an error.  This is called defensive programming.
+
+   Unfortunately, adding checks for values that should just not be
+   entered at all is not always practical: the checks cost cycles and
+   might cost more than it's worth.  For example, some functions are
+   designed so that you may not give it a null pointer.  In those
+   cases it's not sensible to pass it <code>NULL</code> just to see it
+   crash.
 
-   @subsection NormalSSec Normal input
+   Since every experienced programmer add an <code>assert()</code> to
+   ensure that you get a proper failure for the debug builds when a
+   null pointer passed (you add asserts too, right?), you will in this
+   case instead have a controlled (early) crash in the debug build.
 
-   @subsection BorderlineSSec Borderline cases
 
-   @subsection FaultySSec Faulty input
+   @subsection ErrorHandlingTests Error handling
 
-   @subsection ErrorSSec Error handling
+   This is testing that the errors your component is designed to give
+   actually are produced.  For example, testing that trying to open a
+   non-existing file produces a sensible error code.
 
-   @subsection EnvironmentSSec Environment
+
+   @subsection BadEnvironmentTests Environment
 
    Sometimes, modules has to behave well even when the environment
-   fails to work correctly.  Typical examples are: out of dynamic
-   memory, disk is full,
+   fails to work correctly.  Typical examples are when the computer is
+   out of dynamic memory or when the disk is full.  You can emulate
+   this by replacing, e.g., <code>malloc()</code> with your own
+   version that will work for a while, but then fail.  Some things are
+   worth to keep in mind here:
+
+   - Make sure to make the function fail deterministically, so that
+     you really can repeat the test.
+
+   - Make sure that it doesn't just fail immediately.  The unit might
+     have checks for the first case, but might actually fail some time
+     in the near future.
 
-   @section UnitTestSec How to structure a unit test
+
+   @section UnitTest How to structure a unit test
 
    In this section we will give some advice on how to structure the
-   unit tests to make the development run smoothly.
+   unit tests to make the development run smoothly.  The basic
+   structure of a test is:
+
+   - Plan
+   - Test
+   - Report
+
+
+   @subsection TestPlanning Plan the test
+
+   Planning the test means telling how many tests there are.  In the
+   event that one of the tests causes a crash, it is then possible to
+   see that there are fewer tests than expected, and print a proper
+   error message.
+
+   To plan a test, use the @c plan() function in the following manner:
+
+   @code
+   int main(int argc, char *argv[])
+   {
+     plan(5);
+         .
+         .
+         .
+   }
+   @endcode
+
+   If you don't call the @c plan() function, the number of tests
+   executed will be printed at the end.  This is intended to be used
+   while developing the unit and you are constantly adding tests.  It
+   is not indented to be used after the unit has been released.
+
+
+   @subsection TestRunning Execute the test
 
-   @subsection PieceSec Test each piece separately
+   To report the status of a test, the @c ok() function is used in the
+   following manner:
+
+   @code
+   int main(int argc, char *argv[])
+   {
+     plan(5);
+     ok(ducks == paddling_ducks,
+        "%d ducks did not paddle", ducks - paddling_ducks);
+             .
+             .
+             .
+   }
+   @endcode
+
+   This will print a test result line on the standard output in TAP
+   format, which allows TAP handling frameworks (like Test::Harness)
+   to parse the status of the test.
+
+   @subsection TestReport  Report the result of the test
+
+   At the end, a complete test report should be written, with some
+   statistics. If the test returns EXIT_SUCCESS, all tests were
+   successfull, otherwise at least one test failed.
+
+   To get a TAP complient output and exit status, report the exit
+   status in the following manner:
+
+   @code
+   int main(int argc, char *argv[])
+   {
+     plan(5);
+     ok(ducks == paddling_ducks,
+        "%d ducks did not paddle", ducks - paddling_ducks);
+             .
+             .
+             .
+     return exit_status();
+   }
+   @endcode
+
+   @section DontDoThis Ways to not do unit testing
+
+   In this section, we'll go through some quite common ways to write
+   tests that are <em>not</em> a good idea.
+
+   @subsection BreadthFirstTests Doing breadth-first testing
+
+   If you're writing a library with several functions, don't test all
+   functions using size 1, then all functions using size 2, etc.  If a
+   test for size 42 fails, you have no easy way of tracking down why
+   it failed.
+
+   It is better to concentrate on getting one function to work at a
+   time, which means that you test each function for all sizes that
+   you think is reasonable.  Then you continue with the next function,
+   doing the same. This is usually also the way that a library is
+   developed (one function at a time) so stick to testing that is
+   appropriate for now the unit is developed.
+
+   @subsection JustToBeSafeTest Writing unnecessarily large tests
+
+   Don't write tests that use parameters in the range 1-1024 unless
+   you have a very good reason to belive that the component will
+   succeed for 562 but fail for 564 (the numbers picked are just
+   examples).
+
+   It is very common to write extensive tests "just to be safe."
+   Having a test suite with a lot of values might give you a warm
+   fuzzy feeling, but it doesn't really help you find the bugs.  Good
+   tests fail; seriously, if you write a test that you expect to
+   succeed, you don't need to write it.  If you think that it
+   <em>might</em> fail, <em>then</em> you should write it.
+
+   Don't take this as an excuse to avoid writing any tests at all
+   "since I make no mistakes" (when it comes to this, there are two
+   kinds of people: those who admit they make mistakes, and those who
+   don't); rather, this means that there is no reason to test that
+   using a buffer with size 100 works when you have a test for buffer
+   size 96.
+
+   The drawback is that the test suite takes longer to run, for little
+   or no benefit.  It is acceptable to do a exhaustive test if it
+   doesn't take too long to run and it is quite common to do an
+   exhaustive test of a function for a small set of values.
+   Use your judgment to decide what is excessive: your milage may
+   vary.
+*/
+
+/**
+   @example simple.t.c
+
+   This is an simple example of how to write a test using the
+   library.  The output of this program is:
+
+   @code
+   1..1
+   # Testing basic functions
+   ok 1 - Testing gcs()
+   @endcode
+
+   The basic structure is: plan the number of test points using the
+   plan() function, perform the test and write out the result of each
+   test point using the ok() function, print out a diagnostics message
+   using diag(), and report the result of the test by calling the
+   exit_status() function.  Observe that this test does excessive
+   testing (see @ref JustToBeSafeTest), but the test point doesn't
+   take very long time.
+*/
+
+/**
+   @example todo.t.c
+
+   This example demonstrates how to use the <code>todo_start()</code>
+   and <code>todo_end()</code> function to mark a sequence of tests to
+   be done.  Observe that the tests are assumed to fail: if any test
+   succeeds, it is considered a "bonus".
+*/
+
+/**
+   @example skip.t.c
+
+   This is an example of how the <code>SKIP_BLOCK_IF</code> can be
+   used to skip a predetermined number of tests. Observe that the
+   macro actually skips the following statement, but it's not sensible
+   to use anything than a block.
+*/
+
+/**
+   @example skip_all.t.c
 
-   Don't test all functions using size 1, then all functions using
-   size 2, etc.
+   Sometimes, you skip an entire test because it's testing a feature
+   that doesn't exist on the system that you're testing. To skip an
+   entire test, use the <code>skip_all()</code> function according to
+   this example.
  */

unittest/mytap/tap.h

@@ -33,6 +33,8 @@
 /**
    Data about test plan.
 
+   @ingroup MyTAP_Internal
+
    @internal We are using the "typedef struct X { ... } X" idiom to
    create class/struct X both in C and C++.
  */
@@ -60,6 +62,14 @@ typedef struct TEST_DATA {
 extern "C" {
 #endif
 
+/**
+  @defgroup MyTAP_API MyTAP API
+
+  MySQL support for performing unit tests according to TAP.
+
+  @{
+*/
+
 /**
    Set number of tests that is planned to execute.
 
@@ -101,11 +111,14 @@ void ok(int pass, char const *fmt, ...)
 /**
    Skip a determined number of tests.
 
-   Function to print that <em>how_many</em> tests have been
-   skipped.  The reason is printed for each skipped test.  Observe
-   that this function does not do the actual skipping for you, it just
-   prints information that tests have been skipped.  It shall be used
-   in the following manner:
+   Function to print that <em>how_many</em> tests have been skipped.
+   The reason is printed for each skipped test.  Observe that this
+   function does not do the actual skipping for you, it just prints
+   information that tests have been skipped. This function is not
+   usually used, but rather the macro @c SKIP_BLOCK_IF, which does the
+   skipping for you.
+
+   It shall be used in the following manner:
 
    @code
    if (ducks == 0) {
@@ -192,8 +205,8 @@ void BAIL_OUT(char const *fmt, ...)
    return exit_status();
    @endcode
 
-   @returns EXIT_SUCCESS if all tests passed, EXIT_FAILURE if one or
-   more tests failed.
+   @returns @c EXIT_SUCCESS if all tests passed, @c EXIT_FAILURE if
+   one or more tests failed.
  */
 
 int exit_status(void);
@@ -242,6 +255,7 @@ void todo_start(char const *message, ...)
 
 void todo_end();
 
+/** @} */
 
 #ifdef __cplusplus
 }