Errata for Test Driven Development for Embedded C

#49451: In TEST_SETUP, you write to the space to which "expected" points. (One byte is written: the null terminator for the empty string.) However, no space has been allocated for it, and the pointer is not initialized; it's just a (const) char pointer.

The same thing is also done on page 24.--Brendan McDonnell

#49452: Judging by the CppUTest output (on pp. 26-27), "checks" appears to refer to the number of checks that failed--not the number of condition checks _made_, as described on pg. 26.--Brendan McDonnell

#50302: In the book, the implementation for LedDriver_IsOn is as follows:

return ledsImage & (convertLedNumberToBit(ledNumber));

But it seems the following implementation is correct, since the return type of the function is BOOL:

return 0 != ledsImage & (convertLedNumberToBit(ledNumber));--Akiyuki TAKOSHIMA

#50211: The book says "This is a common pattern for
solving platform-independence problems." But it seems "platform-dependence" to be correct since platform-independence is a good thing.--Akiyuki TAKOSHIMA

#49588: In the description of 'Test spy', there are three 'CUT's but second one should be 'DOC'.

"so the test can verify that the correct parameters have been passed to the CUT" --> "so the test can verify that the correct parameters have been passed to the DOC"--Jooyung Han

#50391: static void scheduleEvent(int id, Day day, int minuteOfDay, int event) function is missing a substitution for scheduledEvent.day: scheduledEvent.day = day;
The code is missing from the sample code as well.

--Akiyuki TAKOSHIMA

#50782: Test case ScheduleWeekEndItsMonday under the section Refactor the Tests cannot pass until the logic added in the Complex Conditional Logic section is added. The test case is added in the correct spot on PDF pg. 137, Paper Book pg. 150.--Richard Sloan

#50940: Quotations for expectedOutput in the both tests are incorrect:

"Circular buffer content:\n"
"<31, 41, 59, 26, 53>\n";

should be

"Circular buffer content:\n
<31, 41, 59, 26, 53>\n";--Akiyuki TAKOSHIMA

#49597: In the first code snippet, it is simply wrong because the .Destroy initializer missed the comma at the end of the line.
However, the referencing functions here should be file scope functions.

static LightDriverInterfaceStruct interface =
{
.Destroy = destroy,
.TurnOn = turnOn,
.TurnOff = turnOff
};
--Jooyung Han

#49195: This test:

TEST(LightController, AddingDriverDestroysPrevious )
{
LightDriver spy = LightDriverSpy_Create(1);
LightController_Add(1, spy);
LightController_Destroy();
}

doesn't appear to check anything, which makes it a little unclear. I suppose the test library signals an error if there's a memory leak, but a comment at the end of the test would probably help clarify that. I didn't understand it the first few times I read the test.
--J. B. Rainsberger

#50970: void LightDriver_SetBrightness(LightDriver self, int level)
{
if(isValid(self) && self->brightness)
self->brightness(self, level);
}
=> should be =>
void LightDriver_SetBrightness(LightDriver self, int level)
{
if(isValid(self) && interface->brightness)
interface->brightness(self, level);
}--Jung-joon Kim

#49602: In the code snippet 'isEventDueNow', daysMatch() should take today and day as its parameters because it takes (Day, Day) here. 'daysMatch(Time*, Day)' version will be followed in the next section.--Jooyung Han

#50508: In TEST(Time, NotWeekendDays), CheckThatTimeDoesNotMatch(WEEKEND); is missing after givenThatItIs(FRIDAY);
The online code has the same problem, too.--Akiyuki TAKOSHIMA

#49639: I found that BDD section(14.6) seems contain the wrong code snippet.

It the page 283 of pdf(2.0), BDD sections shows two code snippets,
1) TEST(LightScheduler, ScheduleWeekEndItsSaturday) before refactoring
2) TEST(LightScheduler, ScheduleOffWeekendAndItsSaturdayAndItsTime) after refactoring

However, the text below the second TEST() says "the refactored test is more declarative and ..." but two tests are almost the same with the invariant values replaced by TEST_GROUP variables.
(of course, there are some minor differences such as test name, Wakeup/WakeUp, and On/Off...)

See..
1)
tests/HomeAutomation/LightSchedulerTest.cpp
TEST(LightScheduler, ScheduleWeekEndItsSaturday)
{
LightScheduler_ScheduleTurnOn(3, WEEKEND, 1200);
setTimeTo(SATURDAY, 1200);
LightScheduler_Wakeup();
checkLightState(3, LIGHT_ON);
}

2)
t1/tests/HomeAutomation/LightSchedulerTest.cpp
TEST(LightScheduler, ScheduleOffWeekendAndItsSaturdayAndItsTime)
{
LightScheduler_ScheduleTurnOff(lightNumber, WEEKEND, scheduledMinute);
setTimeTo(SATURDAY, scheduledMinute);
LightScheduler_WakeUp();
checkLightState(lightNumber, LIGHT_OFF);
}

For the text to be valid, the second code snippet should be in BDD style (given/when/then) and I found the code in that style (i guess you planned to use that code) in the t1/tests/HomeAutomation/LightSchedulerTest.cpp file.
(on the line 128)
TEST(LightScheduler, ScheduleOffWeekendAndItsSaturdayAtTheScheduledTime)
{
given(lightNumber); isScheduledFor(WEEKEND); toTurnOffAt(scheduledMinute);
setTimeTo(SATURDAY); at(scheduledMinute);
then(lightNumber); is(LIGHT_OFF);
}
--Jooyung Han

#52019: In the Unity test file sample a semicolon is missing after the declaration of the test group's name. This leads to an error during compilation.
You wrote: "TEST_GROUP(GroupName)"
Should be: "TEST_GROUP(GroupName);"