Adding new 'extend' mode to SkPath::addPath

tests/PathTest.cpp

 /*
  * Copyright 2011 Google Inc.
  *
  * Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
  * found in the LICENSE file.
  */
 
 #include "SkCanvas.h"
 #include "SkPaint.h"
 #include "SkParse.h"
@@ skipping 3042 matching lines @@
     q.close();
     p.addPath(q, -4, -4);
     SkRect expected = {0, 0, 4, 4};
     REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, p.getBounds() == expected);
     p.reset();
     p.reverseAddPath(q);
     SkRect reverseExpected = {4, 4, 8, 8};
     REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, p.getBounds() == reverseExpected);
 }
 
+static void test_addPathJoin(skiatest::Reporter* reporter, bool explicitMoveTo) {

[reed1, 2014/02/07 18:05:50]

addPathExtend?

+    SkPath p, q;
+    if (explicitMoveTo) {
+        p.moveTo(1, 1);
+    }
+    p.lineTo(1, 2);
+    if (explicitMoveTo) {
+        q.moveTo(2, 1);
+    }
+    q.lineTo(2, 2);
+    p.addPath(q, SkPath::kJoin_AddPathMode);
+    uint8_t verbs[4];
+    int verbcount = p.getVerbs(verbs, 4);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbcount == 4);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[0] == SkPath::kMove_Verb);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[1] == SkPath::kLine_Verb);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[2] == SkPath::kLine_Verb);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[3] == SkPath::kLine_Verb);
+}
+
+static void test_addPathAppend(skiatest::Reporter* reporter, bool explicitMoveTo) {
+    SkPath p, q;
+    if (explicitMoveTo) {
+        p.moveTo(1, 1);
+    }
+    p.lineTo(1, 2);
+    if (explicitMoveTo) {
+        q.moveTo(2, 1);
+    }
+    q.lineTo(2, 2);
+    p.addPath(q, SkPath::kAppend_AddPathMode);
+    uint8_t verbs[4];
+    int verbcount = p.getVerbs(verbs, 4);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbcount == 4);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[0] == SkPath::kMove_Verb);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[1] == SkPath::kLine_Verb);
+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[2] == SkPath::kMove_Verb);

[reed1, 2014/02/07 18:05:50]

I wonder if we can make these new test more compact. It appears that these two
differ only in the enum and 1 assert. Can we refactor that to share more code?
If that is a bother right now, it can be done later (or I can do it).

In general I think Skia as a whole needs to put more time into making our tests
as readable/maintainable as possible (not picking on this CL per-se).

+    REPORTER_ASSERT(reporter, verbs[3] == SkPath::kLine_Verb);
+}
+
 static void test_conicTo_special_case(skiatest::Reporter* reporter) {
     SkPath p;
     p.conicTo(1, 2, 3, 4, -1);
     check_path_is_line_and_reset(reporter, &p, 3, 4);
     p.conicTo(1, 2, 3, 4, SK_ScalarInfinity);
     check_path_is_line_pair_and_reset(reporter, &p, 1, 2, 3, 4);
     p.conicTo(1, 2, 3, 4, 1);
     check_path_is_quad_and_reset(reporter, &p, 1, 2, 3, 4);
 }
 
@@ skipping 297 matching lines @@
     test_bad_cubic_crbug229478();
     test_bad_cubic_crbug234190();
     test_android_specific_behavior(reporter);
     test_gen_id(reporter);
     test_path_close_issue1474(reporter);
     test_path_to_region(reporter);
     test_rrect(reporter);
     test_arc(reporter);
     test_arcTo(reporter);
     test_addPath(reporter);
+    test_addPathJoin(reporter, false);
+    test_addPathJoin(reporter, true);
+    test_addPathAppend(reporter, false);
+    test_addPathAppend(reporter, true);
     test_conicTo_special_case(reporter);
     test_get_point(reporter);
     test_contains(reporter);
     PathTest_Private::TestPathTo(reporter);
     PathRefTest_Private::TestPathRef(reporter);
 }