File

spec/util_bitcompat_spec.lua @ 13762:81856814d74f 13.0

util.argparse: Fix bug (regression?) in argument parsing with --foo=bar After recent changes, '--foo bar' was working, but '--foo=bar' was not. The test had a typo (?) (bar != baz) and because util.argparse is not strict by default, the typo was not caught. The typo caused the code to take a different path, and bypassed the buggy handling of --foo=bar options. I've preserved the existing test (typo and all!) because it's still an interesting test, and ensures no unintended behaviour changes compared to the old code. However I've added a new variant of the test, with strict mode enabled and the typo fixed. This test failed due to the bug, and this commit introduces a fix.
author Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com>
date Tue, 11 Mar 2025 18:27:36 +0000
parent 13449:9912baa541c0
line wrap: on
line source

describe("util.bitcompat", function ()
	-- bitcompat will pass through to an appropriate implementation. Our
	-- goal here is to check that whatever implementation is in use passes
	-- these basic sanity checks.

	local bit = require "util.bitcompat";

	it("bor works", function ()
		assert.equal(0xF0FF, bit.bor(0xF000, 0x00F0, 0x000F));
	end);

	it("band works", function ()
		assert.equal(0x0F, bit.band(0xFF, 0x1F, 0x0F));
	end);

	it("bxor works", function ()
		assert.equal(0x13, bit.bxor(0x10, 0x0F, 0x0C));
	end);

	it("rshift works", function ()
		assert.equal(0x0F, bit.rshift(0xFF, 4));
	end);

	it("lshift works", function ()
		assert.equal(0xFF00, bit.lshift(0xFF, 8));
	end);

	it("bnot works", function ()
		assert.equal(0x0000FF00, bit.band(0xFFFFFFFF, bit.bnot(0xFFFF00FF)));
	end);
end);