Add tests to tools/json_schema_compiler

tools/json_schema_compiler/test/array_test.cc

Index: tools/json_schema_compiler/test/array_test.cc
diff --git a/tools/json_schema_compiler/test/array_test.cc b/tools/json_schema_compiler/test/array_test.cc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a4f40008ae1a6607e225783cb0623e2f1b032fda
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/json_schema_compiler/test/array_test.cc
@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+// Copyright (c) 2012 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/19 23:19:59]

These files should all be _unittest.cc not _test.cc

[calamity, 2012/02/20 05:03:37]

Done.

+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+#include "tools/json_schema_compiler/test/array.h"
+
+#include "testing/gtest/include/gtest/gtest.h"
+
+using namespace test::api::array;
+
+namespace {
+
+DictionaryValue* CreateBasicArrayTypeDictionary() {
+  DictionaryValue* value = new DictionaryValue();
+  ListValue* strings_value = new ListValue();
+  strings_value->Append(Value::CreateStringValue("a"));
+  strings_value->Append(Value::CreateStringValue("b"));
+  strings_value->Append(Value::CreateStringValue("c"));

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/18 03:29:02]

You're calling things like this a lot, and presumably in other tests too. I
reckon you should add some kind of test helper that you include, which has
things like

void AppendString(ListValue* value, const std::string& string)
void AppendDouble(ListValue* value, double d)

etc. And then maybe they should be moved into base/values.h

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/19 23:19:59]

Don't worry about this, I'm going to add it to base/values.h.

[calamity, 2012/02/20 05:03:37]

Added a TODO for when your patch goes through.

+  strings_value->Append(Value::CreateStringValue("it's easy as"));
+  ListValue* integers_value = new ListValue();
+  integers_value->Append(Value::CreateIntegerValue(1));
+  integers_value->Append(Value::CreateIntegerValue(2));
+  integers_value->Append(Value::CreateIntegerValue(3));
+  ListValue* booleans_value = new ListValue();
+  booleans_value->Append(Value::CreateBooleanValue(false));
+  booleans_value->Append(Value::CreateBooleanValue(true));
+  ListValue* numbers_value = new ListValue();
+  numbers_value->Append(Value::CreateDoubleValue(6.1));
+  value->SetWithoutPathExpansion("numbers", numbers_value);
+  value->SetWithoutPathExpansion("booleans", booleans_value);
+  value->SetWithoutPathExpansion("strings", strings_value);
+  value->SetWithoutPathExpansion("integers", integers_value);
+  return value;

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/18 03:29:02]

Should return a scoped ptr

[calamity, 2012/02/20 05:03:37]

Done.

+}
+
+Value* CreateItemValue(int val) {
+  scoped_ptr<DictionaryValue> value(new DictionaryValue());

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/18 03:29:02]

Heh, scoped_ptr here but not above? Do one or the other for consistency.
Personally I'd be lazy and not worry about having little utils like this use
scoped_ptr locally.

Though this should return a scoped_ptr.

[calamity, 2012/02/20 05:03:37]

Done.

+  value->SetWithoutPathExpansion("val", Value::CreateIntegerValue(val));

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/18 03:29:02]

Can definitely do just
value->SetString("val", val);
here.

(btw, it's not an important point and I wouldn't go around and change everything
to using SetWithoutPathExpansion/GetWIthoutPathExpansion, but when the string
you're passing through is (a) know and (b) we're in a test, it's find to use
Set/Get I think).

[calamity, 2012/02/20 05:03:37]

Done.

+  return value.release();
+}
+
+}  // namespace
+
+TEST(JsonSchemaCompilerArrayTest, BasicArrayType) {
+  {
+    scoped_ptr<DictionaryValue> value(CreateBasicArrayTypeDictionary());
+    scoped_ptr<BasicArrayType> basic_array_type(new BasicArrayType());
+    EXPECT_TRUE(BasicArrayType::Populate(*value, basic_array_type.get()));
+    EXPECT_TRUE(value->Equals(basic_array_type->ToValue().get()));
+  }
+}
+
+TEST(JsonSchemaCompilerArrayTest, RefArrayType) {
+  {
+    scoped_ptr<DictionaryValue> value(new DictionaryValue());
+    scoped_ptr<ListValue> ref_array(new ListValue());
+    ref_array->Append(CreateItemValue(1));
+    ref_array->Append(CreateItemValue(2));
+    ref_array->Append(CreateItemValue(3));
+    value->SetWithoutPathExpansion("refs", ref_array.release());
+    scoped_ptr<RefArrayType> ref_array_type(new RefArrayType());
+    EXPECT_TRUE(RefArrayType::Populate(*value, ref_array_type.get()));
+    EXPECT_EQ(1, ref_array_type->refs[0]->val);

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/19 23:19:59]

Should test size == 3 too (same elsewhere where appropriate).

[calamity, 2012/02/20 05:03:37]

Done.

+    EXPECT_EQ(2, ref_array_type->refs[1]->val);
+    EXPECT_EQ(3, ref_array_type->refs[2]->val);
+  }
+  {
+    scoped_ptr<DictionaryValue> value(new DictionaryValue());
+    scoped_ptr<ListValue> not_ref_array(new ListValue());
+    not_ref_array->Append(CreateItemValue(1));
+    not_ref_array->Append(Value::CreateIntegerValue(3));
+    value->SetWithoutPathExpansion("refs", not_ref_array.release());
+    scoped_ptr<RefArrayType> ref_array_type(new RefArrayType());
+    EXPECT_FALSE(RefArrayType::Populate(*value, ref_array_type.get()));
+  }
+}
+
+TEST(JsonSchemaCompilerArrayTest, IntegerArrayParamsCreate) {
+  {

[not at google - send to devlin, 2012/02/18 03:29:02]

If you're only testing 1 atomic unit, probably no need for the additional { }s

[calamity, 2012/02/20 05:03:37]

Done.

+    scoped_ptr<ListValue> params_value(new ListValue());
+    scoped_ptr<ListValue> integer_array(new ListValue());
+    integer_array->Append(Value::CreateIntegerValue(2));
+    integer_array->Append(Value::CreateIntegerValue(4));
+    integer_array->Append(Value::CreateIntegerValue(8));
+    params_value->Append(integer_array.release());
+    scoped_ptr<IntegerArray::Params> params(
+        IntegerArray::Params::Create(*params_value));
+    EXPECT_TRUE(params.get());
+    EXPECT_EQ(2, params->nums[0]);
+    EXPECT_EQ(4, params->nums[1]);
+    EXPECT_EQ(8, params->nums[2]);
+  }
+}