added ability to set flags in individual tests #3781
Conversation
| @@ -839,6 +841,8 @@ struct moveWithPP { | |||
| #define Status1(status1) Status1_(__LINE__, status1) | |||
| #define OTName(otName) do {static const u8 otName_[] = _(otName); OTName_(__LINE__, otName_);} while (0) | |||
|
|
|||
| #define FLAG_SET(flagId) do { FlagSet(flagId); gBattleTestRunnerState->data.setFlag = flagId; } while (0) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I'd move the implementation into test/test_runner_battle.h, where you could take advantage of INVALID_IF to report an error if FLAG_SET is called twice in the same test (i.e. called with gBattleTestRunnerState->data.setFlag != 0).
EDIT: As-is, the subsequent calls will succeed, but only the last call's flag will be reset.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also, could you document FLAG_SET at the top of this file, including how it works with PARAMETRIZE/PASSES_RANDOMLY.
I'm not sure that how it works with PARAMETRIZE is particularly intuitive—I think the flag stays set for all later PARAMETRIZEs, unless they happen to use PASSES_RANDOMLY in which case the flag is reset after every trial? It's probably worth adding flag clearing to CB2_BattleTest_NextParameter.
| if (DATA.setFlag != 0) { | ||
| FlagClear(DATA.setFlag); | ||
| DATA.setFlag = 0; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh! I think TearDownBattle doesn't always run? It seems it's only done when a test fails unexpectedly (because that's what sets STATE->tearDownBattle = TRUE), or between PASSES_RANDOMLY trials?
This logic probably wants to be in its own function which is called from BattleTest_TearDown, CB2_BattleTest_NextParameter, and CB2_BattleTest_NextTrial?
|
Btw, this should go into upcoming since it's a new feature. |
|
Closed in favour of #3786 |
Description
Its real quick and dirty. But if its stupid and it works, its not stupid.
Just added a macro the same as the PLAYER/OPPONENT macros that lets you input a flag into FLAG_SET, like so:
The flags ID is stored in the BattleTestData struct and is accessed by the TearDownBattle function in order to actually remove it at the end of the test.
Issue(s) that this PR fixes
None currently. But if you want to change the experience share away from build flags, it might be useful.
Also good if expansion ever adds level caps for a similar reason.
We can just check way more stuff. It'll be cool. Trust me.
Discord contact info
Zatsoo