Type hardening in tests #687
Conversation
| @@ -44,10 +44,10 @@ TEST(api, execution_result_void) | |||
|
|
|||
| TEST(api, execution_result_value) | |||
| { | |||
| const ExecutionResult result = Value{1234}; | |||
| const ExecutionResult result = Value{1234_u32}; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this i32 now, shouldn't there be another test for i64/f32/f64 (pick one or more?)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure what this test is about. Seems to testing implicit Value -> ExecutionResult conversion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah this tests ExecutionResult constructor taking Value
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah this tests
ExecutionResultconstructor takingValue
Right, I guess implicit one, because there's also a test for explicit constuction below.
| @@ -510,8 +510,7 @@ TEST(execute_numeric, i64_extend_i32_u_2) | |||
| "0061736d0100000001060160017f017e030201000a1201100042effdb6f5fdddefd65e1a2000ad0b"); | |||
|
|
|||
| auto instance = instantiate(parse(wasm)); | |||
| const auto r = execute(*instance, 0, {0xff000000}); | |||
| EXPECT_THAT(r, Result(uint64_t{0x00000000ff000000})); | |||
| EXPECT_THAT(execute(*instance, 0, {0xff000000}), Result(0x00000000ff000000_u64)); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this the last such instance or why pick on this one?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The last case, at least in files using _u64.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #687 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.31% 99.31%
=======================================
Files 72 72
Lines 10148 10148
=======================================
Hits 10078 10078
Misses 70 70
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
| else | ||
| { | ||
| if (result_listener->IsInterested()) | ||
| *result_listener << "unsupported type"; |
chfast
force-pushed
the
test_type_hardening
branch
from
033b47f
to
1042781
Compare
No description provided.