[Bf-committers] Added the BlenderUnitTest (BUT) - so now what?
hewi at jupama.org
Fri Jul 8 21:51:02 CEST 2016
Ladies and gents,
Recently, I saw a new function was introduced in the BLI_rand file: "BLI_rng_get_char_n", so I said, hey, it is not been tested ... fair it is not the most important or difficult of functions but hey, you need to start somewhere.
So I went out and into the source code, with following flow:
- downloaded blender git
- branched the 'BUT' :) (BlenderUnitTest)
- CMake changes: added the BUT_GLOBAL_DEBUG option, added the subdirectory, created the BUT library, linked it all together
- created subdir BUT with the .c and .h files
- Cmake generated a codeblocks project
- included the BUT.h header and introduced the BUT_testAll() function (in creator.c)
- created the BLI_rand.blenlib.source.blender.BUT.c file
- to actualy create the BUT_BLI_rng_get_char_n test function (that's what it was all about)
- included a desriotion in the BLI_rand.h file for the BLI_rng_get_char_n function
- included static testers for the BLI_rng_get_char_n function in the BLI_rand.c file
- reversed engineered the BLI_rng_get_char_n function slightly :)
- released the code unther GNU GPL v2 or later, (C) Blender Foundation licence
1 - So what happens now, do I need to make a pull request, or do I generate the BUT branch on the developer site or ...? How can I show you the code?
2 - Also, this effort will lead to feedback and insights, which I would really appreciate to receive here or off-line. But how can you actually review this code?
3 - and also, for me most importantly, maybe you could indicate an area where the bugs are hard to crush, an area where you have trouble finding the solution, maybe I can then dig in to do some testing and possibly find the solution using a bit of reverse engineering?
The latter, I would find very, very cool!
More information about the Bf-committers