Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Review Suggested Edit

You can't approve or reject suggested edits because you haven't yet earned the Edit Posts ability.

~~I found an improvement that is worth posting as an answer to my own question.~~
One thing I was not comfortable with was coming up with test cases and figuring out how many assignments a format string should have by just analyzing it visually. So I had to find a second way to do achieve the same thing that I'm trying to do.
I did it by writing a function that takes a format string as argument, creates a file called `warning.c` which only contains a main function with a single scanf call with the format string specified. Then the function executes a compile command and counts the number of warnings, because there is one warning for each argument that is missing, and I'm giving no arguments. Here is the code for that:
~~```~~
size_t get_no_warnings(const char *fmt)
{
FILE *fp = fopen("warning.c", "w");
if(!fp) {
perror("Error opening file");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
fprintf(fp, "#include <stdio.h>\n\nint main(void) {\n\tscanf(\"%s\");\n}\n", fmt);
fclose(fp);
fp = popen("gcc warning.c -Wall -Wextra -pedantic 2>&1 | grep \"warning: format\" | wc -l", "r");
if(!fp) {
perror("Error executing command");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
char output[100];
fgets(output, sizeof(output), fp);
size_t ret;
if(sscanf(output, "%zu", &ret) != 1) {
perror("Error reading output");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
return ret;
}
```
With that, I can modify my original code like this. I can change
~~assert(count_assignments(tc.fmt) == tc.n);~~
to
~~assert(count_assignments(tc.fmt) == get_no_warnings(tc.fmt));~~
I have not made up my mind yet if I should remove the `n` field from `test_case`. Would look better, but I'm not sure if it's worth the effort. Plus that I assume it's a good thing that I also check if my manual inspection is correct or not. If it's not, there's something about format strings that I don't understand properly.

I have found an improvement that is worth posting as an answer to my question.
One thing that I was not comfortable with was coming up with test cases and figuring out how many assignments a format string should have by just analyzing it visually. so I had to find a second way to achieve the same thing that I'm trying to do.
I did it by writing a function that takes a format string as argument, creates a file called `warning.c` which only contains a main function with a single scanf call with the format string specified. then the function executes a compile command and counts the number of warnings, because there is one warning for each argument that is missing, and I'm giving no arguments. Here is the code for that:
```c
size_t get_no_warnings(const char *fmt)
{
FILE *fp = fopen("warning.c", "w");
if(!fp) {
perror("Error opening file");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
fprintf(fp, "#include <stdio.h>\n\nint main(void) {\n\tscanf(\"%s\");\n}\n", fmt);
fclose(fp);
fp = popen("gcc warning.c -Wall -Wextra -pedantic 2>&1 | grep \"warning: format\" | wc -l", "r");
if(!fp) {
perror("Error executing command");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
char output[100];
fgets(output, sizeof(output), fp);
size_t ret;
if(sscanf(output, "%zu", &ret) != 1) {
perror("Error reading output");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
return ret;
}
```
With that, I can modify my original code like this. I can change
```c
assert(count_assignments(tc.fmt) == tc.n);
```
to
```c
assert(count_assignments(tc.fmt) == get_no_warnings(tc.fmt));
```
I have not made up my mind yet if I should remove the `n` field from `test_case`. would look better, but I'm not sure if it's worth the effort. plus that I assume it's a good thing that I also check if my manual inspection is correct or not. If it's not, there's something about format strings that I don't understand properly.

Communities

Review Suggested Edit