Index: content/common/bluetooth/bluetooth_device_id_unittest.cc |
diff --git a/content/common/bluetooth/bluetooth_device_id_unittest.cc b/content/common/bluetooth/bluetooth_device_id_unittest.cc |
new file mode 100644 |
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0dcf397267c87ff3a3fec0ea65a51ec949e2a0cf |
--- /dev/null |
+++ b/content/common/bluetooth/bluetooth_device_id_unittest.cc |
@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ |
+// Copyright 2016 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved. |
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be |
+// found in the LICENSE file. |
+ |
+#include "content/common/bluetooth/bluetooth_device_id.h" |
+ |
+#include "base/base64.h" |
+#include "base/strings/string_util.h" |
+#include "crypto/random.h" |
+#include "testing/gtest/include/gtest/gtest.h" |
+ |
+using content::BluetoothDeviceId; |
+ |
+namespace { |
+ |
+const char kValidDeviceId1[] = "1234567890123456789012=="; |
+const char kValidDeviceId2[] = "AbCdEfGhIjKlMnOpQrSt+/=="; |
+const char kInvalidLongDeviceId[] = "12345678901234567890123="; |
+const char kInvalidShortDeviceId[] = "12345678901234567890"; |
+const char kInvalidCharacterDeviceId[] = "123456789012345678901*=="; |
+// A base64 string should have a length of a multiple of 4. |
+const char kInvalidLengthDeviceId[] = "123456789012345678901"; |
+ |
+} // namespace |
+ |
+TEST(BluetoothDeviceIdTest, DefaulConstructor) { |
+ BluetoothDeviceId default_id1; |
+ BluetoothDeviceId default_id2; |
+ BluetoothDeviceId valid_id(kValidDeviceId1); |
+ |
+ ASSERT_TRUE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(valid_id.str())); |
Jeffrey Yasskin
2016/06/03 17:22:05
Also EXPECT_FALSE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(defau
ortuno
2016/06/06 22:23:00
IsValid takes a string and we can't get a string b
Jeffrey Yasskin
2016/06/06 23:44:02
Oh, right. What you've done looks good.
|
+ |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED([&]() { return default_id1 == default_id2; }(), ""); |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED([&]() { return default_id1 != default_id2; }(), ""); |
+ |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED([&]() { return default_id1 == valid_id; }(), ""); |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED([&]() { return valid_id == default_id1; }(), ""); |
+ |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED([&]() { return default_id1 != valid_id; }(), ""); |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED([&]() { return valid_id != default_id1; }(), ""); |
+} |
+ |
+TEST(BluetoothDeviceIdTest, StrConstructor) { |
Jeffrey Yasskin
2016/06/03 17:22:05
Assert on == and != too.
ortuno
2016/06/06 22:23:00
Do you mean add statements that compare the object
Jeffrey Yasskin
2016/06/06 23:44:02
Yep, that. Thanks.
|
+ BluetoothDeviceId(kValidDeviceId1); |
+ BluetoothDeviceId(kValidDeviceId2); |
+ // Above call should not crash. |
+ EXPECT_TRUE(true); |
Jeffrey Yasskin
2016/06/03 17:22:05
This doesn't add anything: the test will fail if i
ortuno
2016/06/06 22:23:00
Done.
|
+ |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED(BluetoothDeviceId(""), ""); |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED( |
+ [&]() { return BluetoothDeviceId(kInvalidLongDeviceId); }(), ""); |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED( |
+ [&]() { return BluetoothDeviceId(kInvalidShortDeviceId); }(), ""); |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED( |
+ [&]() { return BluetoothDeviceId(kInvalidCharacterDeviceId); }(), ""); |
+ EXPECT_DEATH_IF_SUPPORTED( |
+ [&]() { return BluetoothDeviceId(kInvalidLengthDeviceId); }(), ""); |
+} |
+ |
+TEST(BluetoothDeviceIdTest, IsValid_Valid) { |
+ EXPECT_TRUE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(kValidDeviceId1)); |
+ EXPECT_TRUE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(kValidDeviceId2)); |
+} |
+ |
+TEST(BluetoothDeviceIdTest, IsValid_Invalid) { |
+ EXPECT_FALSE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid("")); |
+ EXPECT_FALSE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(kInvalidLongDeviceId)); |
+ EXPECT_FALSE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(kInvalidShortDeviceId)); |
+ EXPECT_FALSE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(kInvalidCharacterDeviceId)); |
+ EXPECT_FALSE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(kInvalidLengthDeviceId)); |
+} |
+ |
+TEST(BluetoothDeviceIdTest, Create) { |
+ // Tests that Create generates a valid Device Id. |
+ EXPECT_TRUE(BluetoothDeviceId::IsValid(BluetoothDeviceId::Create().str())) |
+ << "This should never fail."; |
Jeffrey Yasskin
2016/06/03 17:22:05
That's implied by it being in a test. :) Do you me
ortuno
2016/06/06 22:23:00
Hmm actually the opposite haha. I'm afraid that si
Jeffrey Yasskin
2016/06/06 23:44:02
Say something like that in the failure message.
ortuno
2016/06/24 17:39:43
After some more thinking I decided to remove the m
|
+} |