Google Git
Sign in
android / platform / system / libbase / c6efce1e7839de5e263954f0df4e85a97d7fed07
commitc6efce1e7839de5e263954f0df4e85a97d7fed07[log] [tgz]
authorJiyong Park <jiyong@google.com>Mon Dec 20 15:17:58 2021 +0900
committerJiyong Park <jiyong@google.com>Fri Dec 31 11:19:49 2021 +0900
tree8170b985027bad54f2bfcc85f891b8b889fc3c7a
parent7706f49b24f10d6943ca0c6ea516d959e066b802 [diff]
ASSERT/EXPECT_RESULT_OK follows gtest style.

Like other macros ASSERT_* and EXPECT_* from gtest, ASSERT_RESULT_OK and
EXPECT_RESULT_OK now accepts additional error message via "<<" operator
at the end. e.g.

ASSERT_RESULT_OK(stmt) << "custom message";

This change also fixes a bug that "tmp.ok()" is printed instead of the
expression that is given to the macro.

In addition, this change removes CHECK_RESULT_OK which is not used
anywhere.  It has had a potential problem due to its dependency to
android-base/logging.h because that header is not available everywhere.

Test: build and run the following statement.
ASSERT_RESULT_OK([]() -> Result<int> { return Error(EPERM) << "custom error"; }()) << "assertion message";

It builds, and the output is ...

system/libbase/result_test.cpp:604: Failure
Failed
Value of: []() -> Result<int> { return Error(EPERM) << "custom error"; }()
  Actual: custom error: Operation not permitted
Expected: is ok
assertion message

Bug: 210629279
Change-Id: I6abcededec71e3edfb7e5c8bf28d56074c69d623
1 file changed
tree: 8170b985027bad54f2bfcc85f891b8b889fc3c7a
  1. include/
  2. tidy/
  3. .clang-format ⇨ ../../build/soong/scripts/system-clang-format-2
  4. abi_compatibility.cpp
  5. Android.bp
  6. chrono_utils.cpp
  7. chrono_utils_test.cpp
  8. cmsg.cpp
  9. cmsg_test.cpp
  10. CPPLINT.cfg
  11. endian_test.cpp
  12. errors_test.cpp
  13. errors_unix.cpp
  14. errors_windows.cpp
  15. expected_test.cpp
  16. file.cpp
  17. file_test.cpp
  18. format_benchmark.cpp
  19. function_ref_test.cpp
  20. hex.cpp
  21. hex_test.cpp
  22. logging.cpp
  23. logging_splitters.h
  24. logging_splitters_test.cpp
  25. logging_test.cpp
  26. macros_test.cpp
  27. mapped_file.cpp
  28. mapped_file_test.cpp
  29. no_destructor_test.cpp
  30. NOTICE
  31. OWNERS
  32. parsebool.cpp
  33. parsebool_test.cpp
  34. parsedouble_test.cpp
  35. parseint_test.cpp
  36. parsenetaddress.cpp
  37. parsenetaddress_fuzzer.cpp
  38. parsenetaddress_fuzzer.dict
  39. parsenetaddress_test.cpp
  40. PREUPLOAD.cfg
  41. process.cpp
  42. process_test.cpp
  43. properties.cpp
  44. properties_test.cpp
  45. README.md
  46. result_test.cpp
  47. scopeguard_test.cpp
  48. stringprintf.cpp
  49. stringprintf_test.cpp
  50. strings.cpp
  51. strings_test.cpp
  52. test_main.cpp
  53. TEST_MAPPING
  54. test_utils.cpp
  55. test_utils_test.cpp
  56. threads.cpp
  57. utf8.cpp
  58. utf8_test.cpp
README.md

libbase

Who is this library for?

This library is a collection of convenience functions to make common tasks easier and less error-prone.

In this context, “error-prone” covers both “hard to do correctly” and “hard to do with good performance”, but as a general purpose library, libbase's primary focus is on making it easier to do things easily and correctly when a compromise has to be made between “simplest API” on the one hand and “fastest implementation” on the other. Though obviously the ideal is to have both.

Should my routine be added?

The intention is to cover the 80% use cases, not be all things to all users.

If you have a routine that‘s really useful in your project, congratulations. But that doesn’t mean it should be here rather than just in your project.

The question for libbase is “should everyone be doing this?”/“does this make everyone's code cleaner/safer?”. Historically we've considered the bar for inclusion to be “are there at least three unrelated projects that would be cleaned up by doing so”.

If your routine is actually something from a future C++ standard (that isn‘t yet in libc++), or it’s widely used in another library, that helps show that there's precedent. Being able to say “so-and-so has used this API for n years” is a good way to reduce concerns about API choices.

Any other restrictions?

Unlike most Android code, code in libbase has to build for Mac and Windows too.

Code here is also expected to have good test coverage.

By its nature, it‘s difficult to change libbase API. It’s often best to start using your routine just in your project, and let it “graduate” after you're certain that the API is solid.