Index: test/analyzer/gyptest-analyzer.py |
=================================================================== |
--- test/analyzer/gyptest-analyzer.py (revision 1965) |
+++ test/analyzer/gyptest-analyzer.py (working copy) |
@@ -10,12 +10,15 @@ |
import TestGyp |
found = 'Found dependency' |
+found_all = 'Found dependency (all)' |
not_found = 'No dependencies' |
-def _CreateTestFile(files, targets): |
+def _CreateTestFile(files, targets, ignore_targets=[]): |
f = open('test_file', 'w') |
scottmg
2014/08/15 21:30:24
could you add a doc comment here? I find it confus
sky
2014/08/15 22:39:37
Done.
|
- to_write = {'files': files, 'targets': targets } |
+ to_write = {'files': files, |
+ 'targets': targets, |
+ 'ignore_targets': ignore_targets } |
json.dump(to_write, f) |
f.close() |
@@ -37,22 +40,36 @@ |
# over a bug in pylint (E1002). |
test = TestGyp.TestGypCustom(format='analyzer') |
+def CommonArgs(): |
+ return ('-Gconfig_path=test_file', |
+ '-Ganalyzer_output_path=analyzer_output') |
+ |
def run_analyzer(*args, **kw): |
"""Runs the test specifying a particular config and output path.""" |
- args += ('-Gconfig_path=test_file', |
- '-Ganalyzer_output_path=analyzer_output') |
+ args += CommonArgs() |
test.run_gyp('test.gyp', *args, **kw) |
def run_analyzer2(*args, **kw): |
- """Runs the test specifying a particular config and output path.""" |
- args += ('-Gconfig_path=test_file', |
- '-Ganalyzer_output_path=analyzer_output') |
+ """Same as run_analyzer(), but passes in test2.gyp instead of test.gyp.""" |
+ args += CommonArgs() |
test.run_gyp('test2.gyp', *args, **kw) |
-def EnsureContains(targets=set(), matched=False): |
+def run_analyzer3(*args, **kw): |
+ """Same as run_analyzer(), but passes in test3.gyp instead of test.gyp.""" |
+ args += CommonArgs() |
+ test.run_gyp('test3.gyp', *args, **kw) |
+ |
+ |
+def run_analyzer4(*args, **kw): |
+ """Same as run_analyzer(), but passes in test3.gyp instead of test.gyp.""" |
+ args += CommonArgs() |
+ test.run_gyp('test4.gyp', *args, **kw) |
+ |
+ |
+def EnsureContains(targets=set(), matched=False, affected_targets=set()): |
"""Verifies output contains |targets|.""" |
result = _ReadOutputFileContents() |
if result.get('error', None): |
@@ -68,6 +85,12 @@ |
print 'actual targets:', actual_targets, '\nexpected targets:', targets |
test.fail_test() |
+ actual_affected_targets = set(result['affected_targets']) |
+ if actual_affected_targets != affected_targets: |
+ print 'actual affected_targets:', actual_affected_targets, \ |
+ '\nexpected affected_targets:', affected_targets |
+ test.fail_test() |
+ |
if matched and result['status'] != found: |
print 'expected', found, 'got', result['status'] |
test.fail_test() |
@@ -76,6 +99,26 @@ |
test.fail_test() |
+def EnsureMatchedAll(targets): |
+ result = _ReadOutputFileContents() |
+ if result.get('error', None): |
+ print 'unexpected error', result.get('error') |
+ test.fail_test() |
+ |
+ if result.get('warning', None): |
+ print 'unexpected warning', result.get('warning') |
+ test.fail_test() |
+ |
+ if result['status'] != found_all: |
+ print 'expected', found_all, 'got', result['status'] |
+ test.fail_test() |
+ |
+ actual_targets = set(result['targets']) |
+ if actual_targets != targets: |
+ print 'actual targets:', actual_targets, '\nexpected targets:', targets |
+ test.fail_test() |
+ |
+ |
def EnsureError(expected_error_string): |
"""Verifies output contains the error string.""" |
result = _ReadOutputFileContents() |
@@ -110,7 +153,7 @@ |
'-Ganalyzer_output_path=analyzer_output') |
EnsureError('Unable to open file bogus_file') |
-# Verify get error when bad target is specified. |
+# Verify get warning when bad target is specified. |
_CreateTestFile(['exe2.c'], ['bad_target']) |
run_analyzer() |
EnsureWarning('Unable to find all targets') |
@@ -123,7 +166,7 @@ |
# Trivial test of a source. |
_CreateTestFile(['foo.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'all'}) |
# Conditional source that is excluded. |
_CreateTestFile(['conditional_source.c'], []) |
@@ -133,7 +176,7 @@ |
# Conditional source that is included by way of argument. |
_CreateTestFile(['conditional_source.c'], []) |
run_analyzer('-Dtest_variable=1') |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'all'}) |
# Two unknown files. |
_CreateTestFile(['unknown1.c', 'unoknow2.cc'], []) |
@@ -148,12 +191,12 @@ |
# Included dependency |
_CreateTestFile(['unknown1.c', 'subdir/subdir_source.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe', 'exe3'}) |
# Included inputs to actions. |
_CreateTestFile(['action_input.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'all'}) |
# Don't consider outputs. |
_CreateTestFile(['action_output.c'], []) |
@@ -163,7 +206,7 @@ |
# Rule inputs. |
_CreateTestFile(['rule_input.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'all'}) |
# Ignore path specified with PRODUCT_DIR. |
_CreateTestFile(['product_dir_input.c'], []) |
@@ -173,70 +216,140 @@ |
# Path specified via a variable. |
_CreateTestFile(['subdir/subdir_source2.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'all'}) |
# Verifies paths with // are fixed up correctly. |
_CreateTestFile(['parent_source.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe', 'exe3'}) |
# Verifies relative paths are resolved correctly. |
_CreateTestFile(['subdir/subdir_source.h'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe'}) |
# Various permutations when passing in targets. |
_CreateTestFile(['exe2.c', 'subdir/subdir2b_source.c'], ['exe', 'exe3']) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe3'}) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe3'}, |
+ affected_targets={'exe2', 'exe3'}) |
_CreateTestFile(['exe2.c', 'subdir/subdir2b_source.c'], ['exe']) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe2', 'subdir2a'}) |
# Verifies duplicates are ignored. |
_CreateTestFile(['exe2.c', 'subdir/subdir2b_source.c'], ['exe', 'exe']) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe2', 'subdir2a'}) |
_CreateTestFile(['exe2.c'], ['exe']) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe2'}) |
_CreateTestFile(['exe2.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe2'}) |
_CreateTestFile(['subdir/subdir2b_source.c', 'exe2.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe2', 'subdir2a'}) |
+_CreateTestFile(['subdir/subdir2b_source.c'], ['exe3']) |
+run_analyzer() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe3'}, affected_targets={'exe3'}) |
+ |
_CreateTestFile(['exe2.c'], []) |
run_analyzer() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe2'}) |
+_CreateTestFile(['foo.c'], [], ignore_targets=['all']) |
+run_analyzer() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'exe'}) |
+ |
# Assertions when modifying build (gyp/gypi) files, especially when said files |
# are included. |
_CreateTestFile(['subdir2/d.cc'], ['exe', 'exe2', 'foo', 'exe3']) |
run_analyzer2() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'foo'}) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'foo'}, |
+ affected_targets={'exe'}) |
_CreateTestFile(['subdir2/subdir.includes.gypi'], |
['exe', 'exe2', 'foo', 'exe3']) |
run_analyzer2() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'foo'}) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'foo'}, |
+ affected_targets={'exe'}) |
_CreateTestFile(['subdir2/subdir.gyp'], ['exe', 'exe2', 'foo', 'exe3']) |
run_analyzer2() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'foo'}) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'foo'}, |
+ affected_targets={'exe'}) |
_CreateTestFile(['test2.includes.gypi'], ['exe', 'exe2', 'foo', 'exe3']) |
run_analyzer2() |
-EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'exe2', 'exe3'}) |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'exe2', 'exe3'}, |
+ affected_targets={'exe', 'exe2', 'exe3'}) |
# Verify modifying a file included makes all targets dirty. |
_CreateTestFile(['common.gypi'], ['exe', 'exe2', 'foo', 'exe3']) |
run_analyzer2('-Icommon.gypi') |
-EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'exe', 'foo', 'exe2', 'exe3'}) |
+EnsureMatchedAll({'exe', 'exe2', 'foo', 'exe3'}) |
+# Assertions from test3.gyp. |
+_CreateTestFile(['d.c', 'f.c'], ['a']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a'}, affected_targets={'a', 'b'}) |
scottmg
2014/08/15 21:30:24
Huh, I hadn't seen set notation before https://doc
|
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['f.c'], ['a']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a'}, affected_targets={'a'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['f.c'], []) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'d'}) |
scottmg
2014/08/15 21:30:24
could you explain this one? f.c changed, so 'f' is
sky
2014/08/15 22:39:37
My assumption, which could certainly be bogus, is
|
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['c.c', 'e.c'], []) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'a', 'b'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['d.c'], ['a']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a'}, affected_targets={'a', 'b'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['a.c'], ['a', 'b'], ignore_targets=['all']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a'}, affected_targets={'a'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['a.c'], ['a', 'b']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a'}, affected_targets={'all'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['d.c'], ['a', 'b']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a', 'b'}, affected_targets={'a', 'b'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['f.c'], ['a']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a'}, affected_targets={'a'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['a.c'], ['a'], ignore_targets=['all']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, targets={'a'}, affected_targets={'a'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['a.c'], [], ignore_targets=['all']) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'a'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['d.c'], []) |
+run_analyzer3() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'a', 'b'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['f.c'], []) |
scottmg
2014/08/15 21:30:24
comment here that we switched to test4.gyp
sky
2014/08/15 22:39:37
Done.
|
+run_analyzer4() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'e'}) |
+ |
+_CreateTestFile(['d.c'], []) |
+run_analyzer4() |
+EnsureContains(matched=True, affected_targets={'c'}) |
+ |
test.pass_test() |