Add a test for version macros/functions #60
Conversation
|
I don't think SDL needs to be initialized in order to be able to access the |
Free-Pascal-meets-SDL-Website
force-pushed
the
addversiontest
branch
from
b8ba88f to
f6d54e5
Compare
You're right, thanks! EDIT: The issue I was facing with XDG_RUNTIME_DIR has to be solved in the future though, as other tests will need SDL to be initilized. |
tests/testversion.pas
Outdated
|
|
||
| try | ||
| if (SDL_VERSIONNUM(1,2,3) <> 1203) then | ||
| raise ESDL2Error.Create('SDL_VERSIONNUM failed: 1203 expected, found: ' + IntToStr(SDL_VERSIONNUM(1,2,3))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Consider assigning
SDL_VERSIONNUM()to a variable, instead of calculating it twice. - Consider using
WriteStr()here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder, what would be the benefit of WriteStr here?
Best regards
tests/testversion.pas
Outdated
| if (SDL_COMPILEDVERSION <> SDL_VERSIONNUM(CompiledVersion.major, CompiledVersion.minor, CompiledVersion.patch)) then | ||
| raise ESDL2Error.Create('SDL_VERSION or SDL_COMPILEDVERSION failed: Version results do not match!'); | ||
|
|
||
| if (SDL_VERSION_ATLEAST(2,0,0) <> True) then |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Personally I really dislike comparisons with boolean literals (unless we're talking about dynamically-typed languages). I'd simplify this to just:
if not SDL_VERSION_ATLEAST(2,0,0) then
tests/testversion.pas
Outdated
| if (SDL_VERSION_ATLEAST(2,0,0) <> True) then | ||
| raise ESDL2Error.Create('SDL_VERSION_ATLEAST failed: Version at least 2.0.0 should be true!'); | ||
|
|
||
| if (SDL_VERSION_ATLEAST(99,99,99) <> False) then |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similarly here.
if SDL_VERSION_ATLEAST(99,99,99)
Also, (99,99,99) seems excessive. A check against (3,0,0) should suffice.
| uses: suve/[email protected] | ||
| with: | ||
| source: tests/testversion.pas | ||
| flags: Fl/usr/local/lib |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why? - Without this part testversion.pas is not compiled, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I mean strictly this line, where -Fl/usr/local/lib is passed to the compiler. The SDL packages installed from the repo should install libraries in /usr/lib, which is one of the locations where the compiler looks by default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason why it is there, is that without this line the sdl2 library is not found. From my memory, it is related to a new way of storing libraries on big sur, they are in fact not some files stored in a folder anymore but in a more sophisticated indexed "library file".
See. 8f7b010
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, sorry, I missed that this is part of the Mac job. I suppose that since brew is not the official package manager, the authors decided to put stuff in /usr/local over /usr.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see :)
|
Thanks for your hints! I added some patches. About the CI-script though, see above, pls. |
This test results from a examination of issue #30 . - And as it now exists, it can be added to the CI tests.