Assert on actual contents of ScopedVector in scoped_vector_unittest.

Assert on actual contents of ScopedVector in scoped_vector_unittest.

It's great if objects have the expected life cycles, and it's great if the vectors have the right sizes and clear at the right times.

But isn't it also nice if the expected object is being stored in the expected place?

R=willchan@chromium.org
BUG=None


Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=171996

[gavinp, 2012-11-24 14:20:57]

I'm not convinced this is necessary, but while I was in the file I thought I'd
at least suggest we look inside the vector while we test...

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2012-12-04 01:41:49]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
File base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc:158: // Test that shrinking a vector
deletes elements in the dissapearing range.
disappearing

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc:177:
EXPECT_FALSE(watcher.IsWatching(scoped_vector[1]) ||
Just do multiple EXPECT_FALSEs, since if one of them fails, you want to know
which one failed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc:181: EXPECT_EQ(implicit_cast<size_t>(5),
scoped_vector.size());
Move this ahead and do ASSERT_EQ, since if it's false, the others may crash.

[gavinp, 2012-12-08 17:39:59]

Thanks for the review, Will!

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
File base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc:158: // Test that shrinking a vector
deletes elements in the dissapearing range.
On 2012/12/04 01:41:50, willchan wrote:
> disappearing

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc:177:
EXPECT_FALSE(watcher.IsWatching(scoped_vector[1]) ||
On 2012/12/04 01:41:50, willchan wrote:
> Just do multiple EXPECT_FALSEs, since if one of them fails, you want to know
> which one failed.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316156/diff/2001/base/memory/scoped_vector_...
base/memory/scoped_vector_unittest.cc:181: EXPECT_EQ(implicit_cast<size_t>(5),
scoped_vector.size());
On 2012/12/04 01:41:50, willchan wrote:
> Move this ahead and do ASSERT_EQ, since if it's false, the others may crash.

Done. Good point, I'll remember to watch for this in other tests.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-12-08 17:40:15]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/gavinp@chromium.org/11316156/13001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-12-08 19:05:10]

Retried try job too often on win_rel for step(s) unit_tests

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-12-08 19:22:31]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/gavinp@chromium.org/11316156/13001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-12-08 22:39:44]

Change committed as 171996