linux: fix a warning in the process_util unittest...

linux: fix a warning in the process_util unittest

Original review: http://codereview.chromium.org/422003

BUG=none
TEST=compiles on gcc 4.4

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=32972

[vandebo (ex-Chrome), 2009-11-24 20:13:01]

It seems that just (void) doesn't work.

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2009-11-24 20:17:31]

http://codereview.chromium.org/431034/diff/1/2
File base/process_util_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/431034/diff/1/2#newcode422
base/process_util_unittest.cc:422: ASSERT_DEATH(ret = posix_memalign(&value_, 8,
test_size_), "");
Won't this give you an unused variable warning in optimized builds?
Why not do something like:
ASSERT_DEATH(EXPECT_EQ(NULL, posix_memalign(&value_, 8, test_size_)), "");?

[vandebo (ex-Chrome), 2009-11-24 21:03:26]

On 2009/11/24 20:17:31, willchan wrote:
> Why not do something like:
> ASSERT_DEATH(EXPECT_EQ(NULL, posix_memalign(&value_, 8, test_size_)), "");?

Oh, I like that. LG?

[Evan Martin, 2009-11-24 21:08:34]

If you like and it Will likes it, LG.

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2009-11-24 21:12:43]

LGTM

http://codereview.chromium.org/431034/diff/3001/4001
File base/process_util_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/431034/diff/3001/4001#newcode421
base/process_util_unittest.cc:421: ASSERT_DEATH(EXPECT_EQ(ENOMEM,
posix_memalign(&value_, 8, test_size_)), "");
Don't you need to #include <errno.h> for ENOMEM?

[fta, 2009-12-10 13:47:40]

Too bad this fix missed the beta. Please grab it in the 249 branch.

[Evan Martin, 2009-12-10 20:57:45]

On 2009/12/10 13:47:40, fta wrote:
> Too bad this fix missed the beta. Please grab it in the 249 branch.

Ok, I pushed it to the 249 branch.