X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date:	Fri, 31 Oct 2003 09:32:14 +0300 (MSK)
From:	"Alexander Aganichev" <aaganichev AT yandex DOT ru>
Sender:	aaganichev AT yandex DOT ru
Message-Id:	<3FA201EE.000006.19866@tide.yandex.ru>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Yamail [ http://yandex.ru ]
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: locale fixes
In-Reply-To:	<3FA164AB.EC4594A8@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
References:	<3F9E3836 DOT 000008 DOT 02793 AT soapbox DOT yandex DOT ru> <3F9EC775 DOT 41795CD0 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3F9FD9C8 DOT 000003 DOT 05203 AT ariel DOT yandex DOT ru> <3FA164AB DOT EC4594A8 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-source-ip:	208.248.82.254
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

>>> I don't have time to review them properly, but they basically
>>> look OK to me. I'll review them properly on Sunday, hopefully.
>>>
>>> Do you have any test programs for these functions?
>>>
>>> If there are any existing tests, do they still pass, after
>>> applying your patches?
>> 
>> In general, without new setlocale() all locale patches should
>> do nothing more then all those functions currently do. They
>> only add the possibility to modify the behaviour of these
>> functions from external modules.
>
> Sure, it should work the same. ;) But how can you prove it
> without some regression tests?

Because of they obvious to me? ;)

>> For decimal point fixes I'll write the test cases where
>> decimal_point is set from the application to some odd character
>> (like comma or even ampersend) and test that conversion from
>> ASCII and to ASCII still stable.
>
> Sounds good.

Here is the test case:

== decimal.c ==
#include <locale.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>

double d;
long double ld;
char buf[256];
char *end;

int main(int ac, char *av[])
{
    localeconv()->decimal_point[0] = '$';

    strcpy(buf, "12$26");
    d = strtod(buf, &end);
    if((d != 12.26) || (end != &buf[5]))
    {
       printf("strtod() failed\n");
       return -1;
    }
    ld = _strtold(buf, &end);
    if((ld != 12.26L) || (end != &buf[5]))
    {
       printf("strtold() failed\n");
       return -2;
    }
    sprintf(buf, "%.2f", d);
    if(strcmp(buf, "12$26"))
    {
       printf("sprintf failed\n");
       return -3;
    }
    sscanf(buf, "%Lf", &ld);
    if(ld != 12.26L)
    {
       printf("sscanf failed: %Lf\n", ld);
       return -4;
    }

    printf("all tests passed\n");
    return 0;
}
== end of file ==

>> For strcoll and strftime it is possible to modify static data
>> and test that the result is also changed. I tested it with new
>> setlocale() on Russian locale.
>
>Sounds good.

Here are very simple test case for these two:

== collate.c ==
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>

extern unsigned char __dj_collate_table[256];

int main(int ac, char *av[])
{
  int c;

  __dj_collate_table['a'] = 'A';
  __dj_collate_table['A'] = 'a';

  c = strcoll("a", "A");
  printf("strcoll: %s [%s] %s\n", "a", c ? (c > 0) ? ">" : "<" : "==", "A");
  c = strcmp("a", "A");
  printf("strcmp: %s [%s] %s\n", "a", c ? (c > 0) ? ">" : "<" : "==", "A");
  return 0;
}
== end of file ==

== xstrftm.c ==
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <time.h>

extern char __dj_date_format[10];
extern char __dj_time_format[16];

int main(int ac, char *av[])
{
  char buf[99];
  time_t t = time(NULL);

  strcpy(__dj_date_format, "%d|%m|%Y");
  strcpy(__dj_time_format, "[%H|%M|%S]");

  strftime(buf, sizeof(buf), "%x %X", gmtime(&t));
  printf("%s\n", buf);
  return 0;
}
== end of file ==

-- 
Alexander Aganichev

url: http://aaganichev.narod.ru
e-mail: aaganichev AT yandex DOT ru
gsm: +7-095-786-1339

- Raw text -