code review 13651044: bytes: additional test coverage

bytes: additional test coverage

Add coverage for some uncovered bytes methods. The increase in actual coverage is disapointing small.

[dave_cheney.net, 2013-09-11 10:42:40]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com,

I'd like you to review this change to
https://code.google.com/p/go

[bradfitz, 2013-09-11 10:51:20]

LGTM after nits

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go
File src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go...
src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go:1155: t.Fatal("Truncate(-1) should have paniced")
20, not -1

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go
File src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.g...
src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:125: if actual, expected := r.Len(), 1; actual !=
expected {
a/actual, expected/got, want/

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.g...
src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:126: t.Errorf("r.Len(): expected %d bytes, got %v",
expected, actual)
got first, then want:

"Len = %d; want %d", got, want

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.g...
src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:131: if actual, expected := r.Len(), 0; actual !=
expected {
etc

[dave_cheney.net, 2013-09-11 11:06:19]

Thanks for your prompt review Brad, PTAL.

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go
File src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go...
src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go:1155: t.Fatal("Truncate(-1) should have paniced")
On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
> 20, not -1

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go
File src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.g...
src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:125: if actual, expected := r.Len(), 1; actual !=
expected {
On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
> a/actual, expected/got, want/

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.g...
src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:126: t.Errorf("r.Len(): expected %d bytes, got %v",
expected, actual)
On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
> got first, then want:
> 
> "Len = %d; want %d", got, want

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.g...
src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:131: if actual, expected := r.Len(), 0; actual !=
expected {
On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
> etc

Done.

[bradfitz, 2013-09-11 11:19:46]

I'm sure it's fine.



On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 4:06 AM, <dave@cheney.net> wrote:

> Thanks for your prompt review Brad, PTAL.
>
>
>
> https://codereview.appspot.**com/13651044/diff/5001/src/**
>
pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go<https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go>
> File src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go (right):
>
> https://codereview.appspot.**com/13651044/diff/5001/src/**
>
pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go#**newcode1155<https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go#newcode1155>
> src/pkg/bytes/bytes_test.go:**1155: t.Fatal("Truncate(-1) should have
> paniced")
> On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
>
>> 20, not -1
>>
>
> Done.
>
>
> https://codereview.appspot.**com/13651044/diff/5001/src/**
>
pkg/bytes/reader_test.go<https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go>
> File src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go (right):
>
> https://codereview.appspot.**com/13651044/diff/5001/src/**
>
pkg/bytes/reader_test.go#**newcode125<https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go#newcode125>
> src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:**125: if actual, expected := r.Len(), 1;
> actual != expected {
> On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
>
>> a/actual, expected/got, want/
>>
>
> Done.
>
>
> https://codereview.appspot.**com/13651044/diff/5001/src/**
>
pkg/bytes/reader_test.go#**newcode126<https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go#newcode126>
> src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:**126: t.Errorf("r.Len(): expected %d bytes,
> got %v", expected, actual)
> On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
>
>> got first, then want:
>>
>
>  "Len = %d; want %d", got, want
>>
>
> Done.
>
>
> https://codereview.appspot.**com/13651044/diff/5001/src/**
>
pkg/bytes/reader_test.go#**newcode131<https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044/diff/5001/src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go#newcode131>
> src/pkg/bytes/reader_test.go:**131: if actual, expected := r.Len(), 0;
> actual != expected {
> On 2013/09/11 10:51:20, bradfitz wrote:
>
>> etc
>>
>
> Done.
>
>
https://codereview.appspot.**com/13651044/<https://codereview.appspot.com/136...
>

[dave_cheney.net, 2013-09-11 11:21:00]

*** Submitted as https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=0d3484e18799 ***

bytes: additional test coverage

Add coverage for some uncovered bytes methods. The increase in actual coverage
is disapointing small.

R=golang-dev, bradfitz
CC=golang-dev
https://codereview.appspot.com/13651044