[Bf-committers] Added the BlenderUnitTest (BUT) - so now what?

[Lukas Stockner]

Hi!

For code review, please upload the patch (generated by e.g. git diff) here: https://developer.blender.org/differential/diff/create/
I don't really know who's responsible for Blender Unit Tests, but if you know who might be a decent candidate, just add them as a reviewer.

As for buggy areas, a good approach there would probably be to just watch the incoming bugs on developer.blender.org. Alternatively, asking for bugs to solve in #blendercoders on IRC will certainly get a few answers ;)

Lukas

Am 08.07.2016 um 21:51 schrieb hewi jupama:
> 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!
> 
> regards, Hewi
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/attachments/20160708/5dd53376/attachment.pgp