Rémi Bernon (@rbernon) commented about dlls/bluetoothapis/tests/sdp.c:
case SDP_TYPE_STRING:return wine_dbg_sprintf( "{.string={%p %lu}}", data->data.string.value,data->data.string.length );case SDP_TYPE_URL:return wine_dbg_sprintf( "{.url={%p %lu}}", data->data.url.value,data->data.url.length );case SDP_TYPE_SEQUENCE:return wine_dbg_sprintf( "{.sequence={%p %lu}}", data->data.sequence.value,data->data.sequence.length );case SDP_TYPE_ALTERNATIVE:return wine_dbg_sprintf( "{.alternative={%p %lu}}", data->data.alternative.value,data->data.alternative.length );default:return debugstr_sdp_element_data_unknown( data );- }
+}
This is a lot of code for debug printing, do we really need it in the tests?
There's a lot of tests, and I don't think being verbose in the test messages have been considered very useful yet. After a couple hundred of written tests you will likely find the `ok("got %#x", err)` pattern very appealing.
In general tests aren't supposed to fail, so the messages don't matter much. When they do, you will anyway likely need to reproduce the failure locally, where you can add as much detail about it as you like.
Note that we also have a strong test output size limit of 32K, and any todo_wine that is printed out should stay as little verbose as possible in order to not reach that limit and fail the test.