On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 01:52:58PM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 10:54:55PM +0800, shejialuo wrote:
> > diff --git a/t/unit-tests/u-string-list.c b/t/unit-tests/u-string-list.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..0c148684ea
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/t/unit-tests/u-string-list.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
> > +static void t_string_list_split(const char *data, int delim, int maxsplit,
> > + struct string_list *expected_strings)
> > +{
> > + struct string_list list = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP;
> > + int len;
> > +
> > + len = string_list_split(&list, data, delim, maxsplit);
> > + cl_assert_equal_i(len, expected_strings->nr);
> > + t_check_string_list(&list, expected_strings);
> > +
> > + t_string_list_clear(&list, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void test_string_list__split(void)
> > +{
> > + struct string_list expected_strings = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP;
> > +
> > + t_create_string_list_dup(&expected_strings, 0, "foo", "bar", "baz", NULL);
> > + t_string_list_split("foo:bar:baz", ':', -1, &expected_strings);
>
> Could we adapt `t_string_list_split()` so that it accepts the expected
> strings as varargs? If so we could simplify the logic in this function
> here.
>
That's a good suggestion. I will update in the next version.
> Patrick
