Re: The next couple of months

From: Daniel Black <daniel.subs_at_internode.on.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 08:23:15 +1100

On Thursday 03 December 2009 07:52:00 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Daniel Black wrote:
> >> - br-dblack-codecoverage -- Daniel will have to comment on this, but I
> >> would like to have some library test code coverage data so we can write
> >> a few more tests to get as close to complete library coverage as
> >> possible
> >
> > now that I know how to do malloc failing tests I can't see any reason for
> > 100%. Bits that we can't write test cases for probably aren't reachable.
>
> Actually, you can simulate memory allocation failures in the library by
> providing a replacement allocator function to dkim_init()

why was this malloc function pointer put here?
> that just
> returns NULL instead of actually trying to do an allocation. That's
> always been there; I just never thought to use it.

the fork just allows every code path to be tested without having malloc return
a static value each time.
Received on Wed Dec 02 2009 - 21:23:33 PST