Fix padding being in the wrong place in SAVED_FRIEND struct

[robinlinden]

This change is 

[isotoxin]

I have tested it with my client. Not it works.

[GrayHatter]

---

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1.
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, all discussions resolved, some commit checks failed.

---

Comments from Reviewable

[iphydf]

Generally looks good. The reason I'm nitpicking a bit on this code is that ideally the tests are a kind of documentation, showing how things can be done. Global variables are not how things are done, despite most of our current tests saying so.

---

Review status: 1 of 3 files reviewed at latest revision, 6 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 19 at r2 (raw file):

#endif

static void set_random(Tox *m, bool (*function)(Tox *, const uint8_t *, size_t, TOX_ERR_SET_INFO *), size_t length)

Perhaps call this function setter. function is a bit too generic.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 25 at r2 (raw file):

    for (i = 0; i < length; ++i) {
        text[i] = ('A' + (rand() % 26));

This is non-portable. It won't do what you expect on EBCDIC. It also doesn't matter, because nobody ever displays or otherwise interprets these, so just use rand().

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 33 at r2 (raw file):

}

static uint8_t status_to_compare[TOX_MAX_STATUS_MESSAGE_LENGTH] = { 0 };

Put these two into a struct and pass a pointer to the struct as user data.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 53 at r2 (raw file):

    uint8_t address[TOX_ADDRESS_SIZE];
    tox_self_get_address(tox1, address);
    tox_friend_add_norequest(tox2, address, NULL);

Although this technically works because the public key is a prefix of the address, it's misleading. We want the public key here.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 71 at r2 (raw file):

    tox_callback_friend_status_message(tox1, statuschange_callback);

    const uint32_t iteration_interval = tox_iteration_interval(tox1);

Also technically correct, because the iteration interval happens to always be the same, but you should really call it in every iteration: c_sleep(tox_iteration_interval(tox1));. You could also take the min of the two toxes iteration interval to be even more correct, but that doesn't really matter.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 87 at r2 (raw file):

    while (true) {
        if (memcmp(reference_name, name_to_compare, TOX_MAX_NAME_LENGTH) == 0 &&

When you got your struct with the name in it, also add a bool that says something like received_name and received_status_message that you can check here. Not really for efficiency, but these comparisons are slightly unclear.

---

Comments from Reviewable

[robinlinden]

Review status: 0 of 2 files reviewed at latest revision, 6 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 19 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, iphydf wrote…

Perhaps call this function setter. function is a bit too generic.

Done.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 25 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, iphydf wrote…

This is non-portable. It won't do what you expect on EBCDIC. It also doesn't matter, because nobody ever displays or otherwise interprets these, so just use rand().

Done.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 33 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, iphydf wrote…

Put these two into a struct and pass a pointer to the struct as user data.

Done.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 53 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, iphydf wrote…

Although this technically works because the public key is a prefix of the address, it's misleading. We want the public key here.

Done.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 71 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, iphydf wrote…

Also technically correct, because the iteration interval happens to always be the same, but you should really call it in every iteration: c_sleep(tox_iteration_interval(tox1));. You could also take the min of the two toxes iteration interval to be even more correct, but that doesn't really matter.

Done.

---

auto_tests/save_friend_test.c, line 87 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, iphydf wrote…

When you got your struct with the name in it, also add a bool that says something like received_name and received_status_message that you can check here. Not really for efficiency, but these comparisons are slightly unclear.

Done.

---

Comments from Reviewable

[iphydf]

---

Review status: 0 of 3 files reviewed at latest revision, 6 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed.

---

Comments from Reviewable

[iphydf]

Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r2, 2 of 2 files at r3.
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, all discussions resolved, some commit checks failed.

---

Comments from Reviewable

[nurupo]

Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r2, 2 of 2 files at r4.
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, all discussions resolved, all commit checks successful.

---

Comments from Reviewable

[nurupo]

---

Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, all discussions resolved, all commit checks successful.

---

Comments from Reviewable