I was looking at verify_reg_() in programs/reg/tests/reg.c:61 and noticed some simple if statements:
if (todo & TODO_REG_TYPE) todo_wine lok(type == exp_type, "got wrong type %d, expected %d\n", type, exp_type); else lok(type == exp_type, "got wrong type %d, expected %d\n", type, exp_type); if (todo & TODO_REG_SIZE) todo_wine lok(size == exp_size, "got wrong size %d, expected %d\n", size, exp_size); else lok(size == exp_size, "got wrong size %d, expected %d\n", size, exp_size); if (todo & TODO_REG_DATA) todo_wine lok(memcmp(data, exp_data, size) == 0, "got wrong data\n"); else lok(memcmp(data, exp_data, size) == 0, "got wrong data\n");
Simple enough, except if I pass TODO_REG_TYPE to this function it never even tries the size or data blocks. While this makes sense to implement (You can't test the data if you don't know it's size) I have no idea *how* it does it.
I've tried the obvious - the mask values don't overlap in a way that would cause it to fallthrough. The lok and todo_wine macros don't have anything in them that returns.
In fact the todo_wine macro appears to start a loop for some reason and all in all I'm very confused as to how exactly it's doing this.
I'm curious as to how this works under the hood.
I also need to stick a broken() in there somewhere but every time I do it falls through, and I don't want to rewrite the entire verify_reg_() function for a single exception.
(If you're interested, reg add a REG_BINARY with an odd number of characters prefixes a 0 nibble, but suffixes it in XP)
On 16 October 2014 23:59, Jonathan Vollebregt jnvsor@gmail.com wrote:
I was looking at verify_reg_() in programs/reg/tests/reg.c:61 and noticed some simple if statements:
if (todo & TODO_REG_TYPE) todo_wine lok(type == exp_type, "got wrong type %d, expected%d\n", type, exp_type); else lok(type == exp_type, "got wrong type %d, expected %d\n", type, exp_type); if (todo & TODO_REG_SIZE) todo_wine lok(size == exp_size, "got wrong size %d, expected %d\n", size, exp_size); else lok(size == exp_size, "got wrong size %d, expected %d\n", size, exp_size); if (todo & TODO_REG_DATA) todo_wine lok(memcmp(data, exp_data, size) == 0, "got wrong data\n"); else lok(memcmp(data, exp_data, size) == 0, "got wrong data\n");
Simple enough, except if I pass TODO_REG_TYPE to this function it never even tries the size or data blocks. While this makes sense to implement (You can't test the data if you don't know it's size) I have no idea *how* it does it.
From your description, it's not all that clear to me what's actually happening.
In fact the todo_wine macro appears to start a loop for some reason and all
The "loop" is mostly just to generate a proper block around the tests it contains.
On 10/17/2014 10:18 AM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
From your description, it's not all that clear to me what's actually happening.
Well there are a bunch of if/else lines in a function.
https://github.com/wine-mirror/wine/blob/a99d3c5bffe08/programs/reg/tests/re...
You'd expect each if/else to run regardless of the previous one's branch, but if todo is TODO_REG_TYPE for instance it will never run either branch from the following 2 if statements.
It's as if it returns or as if the rest of the if statements are wrapped in the first one's else block, but I don't see anything like that happening...
Examining an else line with cpp gives a clearer picture:
(winetest_set_location("reg.c", line), 0) ? (void)0 : winetest_ok(size == exp_size, "got wrong size %d, expected %d\n", size, exp_size);
This is being evaluated as false in a ternary operator...
(winetest_set_location("reg.c", line), 0)
winetest_set_location returns void. I didn't even know this was supposed to be valid C, and even if I did I have no idea why it's doing what it's doing!
On 17 October 2014 12:57, Jonathan Vollebregt jnvsor@gmail.com wrote:
Well there are a bunch of if/else lines in a function.
https://github.com/wine-mirror/wine/blob/a99d3c5bffe08/programs/reg/tests/re...
You'd expect each if/else to run regardless of the previous one's branch, but if todo is TODO_REG_TYPE for instance it will never run either branch from the following 2 if statements.
From a quick test it seems to work pretty much as expected here. Do
you have some kind of minimal patch that demonstrates the issue?
Oh great. Now I can't reproduce it. This may all have been a figment of my sleep deprivation.
On 10/17/2014 01:25 PM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
On 17 October 2014 12:57, Jonathan Vollebregt jnvsor@gmail.com wrote:
Well there are a bunch of if/else lines in a function.
https://github.com/wine-mirror/wine/blob/a99d3c5bffe08/programs/reg/tests/re...
You'd expect each if/else to run regardless of the previous one's branch, but if todo is TODO_REG_TYPE for instance it will never run either branch from the following 2 if statements.
From a quick test it seems to work pretty much as expected here. Do you have some kind of minimal patch that demonstrates the issue?
-
Henri Verbeet -
Jonathan Vollebregt