RFR(S): 8165433: Convert Test_linked_list to Gtest

[Kirill Zhaldybin]

Coleen,

Thank you for review!

Regards, Kirill

On 12.09.2016 15:30, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
> This looks good.
> Coleen
>
>
> On 9/12/16 8:16 AM, Kirill Zhaldbybin wrote:
>> David,
>>
>> Thank you for review!
>>
>> Regards, Kirill
>>
>> On 09/09/2016 08:03 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> On 8/09/2016 10:32 PM, Kirill Zhaldybin wrote:
>>>> Igor,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for clarifying this!
>>>
>>> Indeed! Thank you very much.
>>>
>>>> David,
>>>>
>>>> Here are a new WebRev:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kzhaldyb/webrevs/JDK-8165433/webrev.03/
>>>>
>>>> I changed asserts like ASSERT_NE(i, (Integer*) NULL) to ASSERT_TRUE,
>>>> changed order in ASSERT_EQ with NULL, changed order in ASSERT_EQ to 
>>>> make
>>>> expected value first parameter.
>>>>
>>>> Could you please let me know your opinion?
>>>
>>> Looks terrific! :)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Kirill
>>>>
>>>> On 08.09.2016 12:22, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>>>>> David,
>>>>>
>>>>> I ain’t Kim, but if you don’t mind I’d like to say what I see as the
>>>>> best way to handle that is and why.
>>>>>
>>>>> as Kirill said gtest’s asserts are strict about types and one will 
>>>>> get
>>>>> compile time error trying to compare different types, long and 
>>>>> pointer
>>>>> in this case (as the matter of fact, you can not compare pointers to
>>>>> different types either). however gtest supports comparison w/ NULL,
>>>>> but only in ASSERT/EXPECT_EQ and only if NULL is the 1st argument[1].
>>>>> so you can easily write ASSERT_EQ(NULL, i), but you can not write
>>>>> ASSERT_NE(NULL, i), you have to write ASSERT_NE(i != NULL) instead,
>>>>> [2] is the explanation from gtest faq why it so, in two words: in 
>>>>> case
>>>>> ASSERT_NE(i, NULL) fails, you do know the value of i so ASSERT_TRUE(i
>>>>> != NULL) won’t lose any information.
>>>>>
>>>>> summing up, Kirill’s code can be changed like that:
>>>>>> diff -r 28f34e9482b4 test/native/utilities/test_linkedlist.cpp
>>>>>>     Integer* i = ll.find(six);
>>>>>> -  ASSERT_NE(i, (Integer*) NULL) << "Should find it";
>>>>>> +  ASSERT_TRUE(i != NULL) << "Should find it";
>>>>>>     ASSERT_EQ(i->value(), six.value()) << "Should be 6";
>>>>>>       i = ll.find(three);
>>>>>> -  ASSERT_EQ(i, (Integer*) NULL) << "Not in the list";
>>>>>> +  ASSERT_EQ(NULL, i) << "Not in the list";
>>>>> as you can see, there is no casting.
>>>>>
>>>>> could you please let me know what you think about the proposed way?
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] actually, the 1st argument in ASSERT/EXPECT_EQ is assumed to 
>>>>> be an
>>>>> expected value, so you should write ASSERT_EQ(5, a) not 
>>>>> ASSERT_EQ(a, 5)
>>>>> [2]
>>>>> https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googletest/docs/V1_7_FAQ.md#why-does-google-test-support-expect_eqnull-ptr-and-assert_eqnull-ptr-but-not-expect_nenull-ptr-and-assert_nenull-ptr 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> — Igor
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 8, 2016, at 10:18 AM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You should not have to cast NULL:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 77   ASSERT_EQ(i, (Integer*) NULL) << "Not in the list";
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> why is this needed? Is this something broken in gtest ??
>>>>>>> There is no ASSERT_NULL (we likely should add it) in GTest so 
>>>>>>> ASSERT_EQ
>>>>>>> is used.
>>>>>>> ASSERT_EQ is pretty strict about types so since NULL resolves to 
>>>>>>> long
>>>>>>> int (at least on my host) it cannot be compared with Integer*.
>>>>>> I'm unhappy about this, it is a deficiency in Gtest. We should 
>>>>>> not be
>>>>>> casting  0 or NULL to specific pointer types.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> cc'ing Kim to get his opinion on the best way to handle this.
>>>>
>>
>