\input texinfo @c -*-texinfo-*-
@c %**start of header
@setfilename check.info
@include version.texi
@settitle Check @value{VERSION}
@syncodeindex fn cp
@syncodeindex tp cp
@syncodeindex vr cp
@c %**end of header
@copying
This manual is for Check
(version @value{VERSION}, @value{UPDATED}),
a unit testing framework for C.
Copyright @copyright{} 2001--2014 Arien Malec, Branden Archer, Chris Pickett,
Fredrik Hugosson, and Robert Lemmen.
@quotation
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
under the terms of the @acronym{GNU} Free Documentation License,
Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software
Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover texts, and no
Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section
entitled ``@acronym{GNU} Free Documentation License.''
@end quotation
@end copying
@dircategory Software development
@direntry
* Check: (check)Introduction.
@end direntry
@titlepage
@title Check
@subtitle A Unit Testing Framework for C
@subtitle for version @value{VERSION}, @value{UPDATED}
@author Arien Malec
@author Branden Archer
@author Chris Pickett
@author Fredrik Hugosson
@author Robert Lemmen
@author Robert Collins
@c The following two commands start the copyright page.
@page
@vskip 0pt plus 1filll
@insertcopying
@end titlepage
@c Output the table of contents at the beginning.
@contents
@ifnottex
@node Top, Introduction, (dir), (dir)
@top Check
@insertcopying
Please send corrections to this manual to
@email{check-devel AT lists.sourceforge.net}. We'd prefer it if you can
send a unified diff (@command{diff -u}) against the
@file{doc/check.texi} file that ships with Check, but if that is not
possible something is better than nothing.
@end ifnottex
@menu
* Introduction::
* Unit Testing in C::
* Tutorial::
* Advanced Features::
* Supported Build Systems::
* Conclusion and References::
* Environment Variable Reference::
* Copying This Manual::
* Index::
@detailmenu
--- The Detailed Node Listing ---
Unit Testing in C
* Other Frameworks for C::
Tutorial: Basic Unit Testing
* How to Write a Test::
* Setting Up the Money Build Using Autotools::
* Setting Up the Money Build Using CMake::
* Test a Little::
* Creating a Suite::
* SRunner Output::
Advanced Features
* Convenience Test Functions::
* Running Multiple Cases::
* No Fork Mode::
* Test Fixtures::
* Multiple Suites in one SRunner::
* Selective Running of Tests::
* Testing Signal Handling and Exit Values::
* Looping Tests::
* Test Timeouts::
* Determining Test Coverage::
* Finding Memory Leaks::
* Test Logging::
* Subunit Support::
Test Fixtures
* Test Fixture Examples::
* Checked vs Unchecked Fixtures::
Test Logging
* XML Logging::
* TAP Logging::
Environment Variable Reference
Copying This Manual
* GNU Free Documentation License:: License for copying this manual.
@end detailmenu
@end menu
@node Introduction, Unit Testing in C, Top, Top
@chapter Introduction
@cindex introduction
Check is a unit testing framework for C. It was inspired by similar
frameworks that currently exist for most programming languages; the
most famous example being @uref{http://www.junit.org, JUnit} for Java.
There is a list of unit test frameworks for multiple languages at
@uref{http://www.xprogramming.com/software.htm}. Unit testing has a
long history as part of formal quality assurance methodologies, but
has recently been associated with the lightweight methodology called
Extreme Programming. In that methodology, the characteristic practice
involves interspersing unit test writing with coding (``test a
little, code a little''). While the incremental unit test/code
approach is indispensable to Extreme Programming, it is also
applicable, and perhaps indispensable, outside of that methodology.
The incremental test/code approach provides three main benefits to the
developer:
@enumerate
@item
Because the unit tests use the interface to the unit being tested,
they allow the developer to think about how the interface should be
designed for usage early in the coding process.
@item
They help the developer think early about aberrant cases, and code
accordingly.
@item
By providing a documented level of correctness, they allow the
developer to refactor (see @uref{http://www.refactoring.com})
aggressively.
@end enumerate
That third reason is the one that turns people into unit testing
addicts. There is nothing so satisfying as doing a wholesale
replacement of an implementation, and having the unit tests reassure
you at each step of that change that all is well. It is like the
difference between exploring the wilderness with and without a good
map and compass: without the proper gear, you are more likely to
proceed cautiously and stick to the marked trails; with it, you can
take the most direct path to where you want to go.
Look at the Check homepage for the latest information on Check:
@uref{http://check.sourceforge.net}.
The Check project page is at:
@uref{http://sourceforge.net/projects/check/}.
@node Unit Testing in C, Tutorial, Introduction, Top
@chapter Unit Testing in C
@ C unit testing
The approach to unit testing frameworks used for Check originated with
Smalltalk, which is a late binding object-oriented language supporting
reflection. Writing a framework for C requires solving some special
problems that frameworks for Smalltalk, Java or Python don't have to
face. In all of those language, the worst that a unit test can do is
fail miserably, throwing an exception of some sort. In C, a unit test
is just as likely to trash its address space as it is to fail to meet
its test requirements, and if the test framework sits in the same
address space, goodbye test framework.
To solve this problem, Check uses the @code{fork()} system call to
create a new address space in which to run each unit test, and then
uses message queues to send information on the testing process back to
the test framework. That way, your unit test can do all sorts of
nasty things with pointers, and throw a segmentation fault, and the
test framework will happily note a unit test error, and chug along.
The Check framework is also designed to play happily with common
development environments for C programming. The author designed Check
around Autoconf/Automake (thus the name Check: @command{make check} is
the idiom used for testing with Autoconf/Automake). Note however that
Autoconf/Automake are NOT necessary to use Check; any build system
is sufficient. The test failure messages thrown up by Check use the
common idiom of @samp{filename:linenumber:message} used by @command{gcc}
and family to report problems in source code. With (X)Emacs, the output
of Check allows one to quickly navigate to the location of the unit test
that failed; presumably that also works in VI and IDEs.
@menu
* Other Frameworks for C::
@end menu
@node Other Frameworks for C, , Unit Testing in C, Unit Testing in C
@section Other Frameworks for C
@cindex other frameworks
@cindex frameworks
The authors know of the following additional unit testing frameworks
for C:
@table @asis
@item AceUnit
AceUnit (Advanced C and Embedded Unit) bills itself as a comfortable C
code unit test framework. It tries to mimic JUnit 4.x and includes
reflection-like capabilities. AceUnit can be used in resource
constraint environments, e.g. embedded software development, and
importantly it runs fine in environments where you cannot include a
single standard header file and cannot invoke a single standard C
function from the ANSI / ISO C libraries. It also has a Windows port.
It does not use forks to trap signals, although the authors have
expressed interest in adding such a feature. See the
@uref{http://aceunit.sourceforge.net/, AceUnit homepage}.
@item GNU Autounit
Much along the same lines as Check, including forking to run unit tests
in a separate address space (in fact, the original author of Check
borrowed the idea from @acronym{GNU} Autounit). @acronym{GNU} Autounit
uses GLib extensively, which means that linking and such need special
options, but this may not be a big problem to you, especially if you are
already using GTK or GLib. See the @uref{http://autounit.tigris.org/,
GNU Autounit homepage}.
@item cUnit
Also uses GLib, but does not fork to protect the address space of unit
tests. See the
@uref{http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://people.codefactory.se/~spotty/cunit/,
archived cUnit homepage}.
@item CUnit
Standard C, with plans for a Win32 GUI implementation. Does not
currently fork or otherwise protect the address space of unit tests.
In early development. See the @uref{http://cunit.sourceforge.net,
CUnit homepage}.
@item CuTest
A simple framework with just one .c and one .h file that you drop into
your source tree. See the @uref{http://cutest.sourceforge.net, CuTest
homepage}.
@item CppUnit
The premier unit testing framework for C++; you can also use it to test C
code. It is stable, actively developed, and has a GUI interface. The
primary reasons not to use CppUnit for C are first that it is quite
big, and second you have to write your tests in C++, which means you
need a C++ compiler. If these don't sound like concerns, it is
definitely worth considering, along with other C++ unit testing
frameworks. See the
@uref{http://cppunit.sourceforge.net/cppunit-wiki, CppUnit homepage}.
@item embUnit
embUnit (Embedded Unit) is another unit test framework for embedded
systems. This one appears to be superseded by AceUnit.
@uref{https://sourceforge.net/projects/embunit/, Embedded Unit
homepage}.
@item MinUnit
A minimal set of macros and that's it! The point is to
show how easy it is to unit test your code. See the
@uref{http://www.jera.com/techinfo/jtns/jtn002.html, MinUnit
homepage}.
@item CUnit for Mr. Ando
A CUnit implementation that is fairly new, and apparently still in
early development. See the
@uref{http://park.ruru.ne.jp/ando/work/CUnitForAndo/html/, CUnit for
Mr. Ando homepage}.
@end table
This list was last updated in March 2008. If you know of other C unit
test frameworks, please send an email plus description to
@email{check-devel AT lists.sourceforge.net} and we will add the entry
to this list.
It is the authors' considered opinion that forking or otherwise
trapping and reporting signals is indispensable for unit testing (but
it probably wouldn't be hard to add that to frameworks without that
feature). Try 'em all out: adapt this tutorial to use all of the
frameworks above, and use whichever you like. Contribute, spread the
word, and make one a standard. Languages such as Java and Python are
fortunate to have standard unit testing frameworks; it would be desirable
that C have one as well.
@node Tutorial, Advanced Features, Unit Testing in C, Top
@chapter Tutorial: Basic Unit Testing
This tutorial will use the JUnit
@uref{http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/testinfected/testing.htm, Test
Infected} article as a starting point. We will be creating a library
to represent money, @code{libmoney}, that allows conversions between
different currency types. The development style will be ``test a
little, code a little'', with unit test writing preceding coding.
This constantly gives us insights into module usage, and also makes
sure we are constantly thinking about how to test our code.
@menu
* How to Write a Test::
* Setting Up the Money Build Using Autotools::
* Setting Up the Money Build Using CMake::
* Test a Little::
* Creating a Suite::
* SRunner Output::
@end menu
@node How to Write a Test, Setting Up the Money Build Using Autotools, Tutorial, Tutorial
@section How to Write a Test
Test writing using Check is very simple. The file in which the checks
are defined must include @file{check.h} as so:
@example
@verbatim
#include <check.h>
@end verbatim
@end example
The basic unit test looks as follows:
@example
@verbatim
START_TEST (test_name)
{
/* unit test code */
}
END_TEST
@end verbatim
@end example
The @code{START_TEST}/@code{END_TEST} pair are macros that setup basic
structures to permit testing. It is a mistake to leave off the
@code{END_TEST} marker; doing so produces all sorts of strange errors
when the check is compiled.
@node Setting Up the Money Build Using Autotools, Setting Up the Money Build Using CMake, How to Write a Test, Tutorial
@section Setting Up the Money Build Using Autotools
Since we are creating a library to handle money, we will first create
an interface in @file{money.h}, an implementation in @file{money.c},
and a place to store our unit tests, @file{check_money.c}. We want to
integrate these core files into our build system, and will need some
additional structure. To manage everything we'll use Autoconf,
Automake, and friends (collectively known as Autotools) for this
example. Note that one could do something similar with ordinary
Makefiles, or any other build system. It is in the authors' opinion that
it is generally easier to use Autotools than bare Makefiles, and they
provide built-in support for running tests.
Note that this is not the place to explain how Autotools works. If
you need help understanding what's going on beyond the explanations
here, the best place to start is probably Alexandre Duret-Lutz's
excellent
@uref{http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~adl/autotools.html,
Autotools tutorial}.
The examples in this section are part of the Check distribution; you
don't need to spend time cutting and pasting or (worse) retyping them.
Locate the Check documentation on your system and look in the
@samp{example} directory. The standard directory for GNU/Linux
distributions should be @samp{/usr/share/doc/check/example}. This
directory contains the final version reached the end of the tutorial. If
you want to follow along, create backups of @file{money.h},
@file{money.c}, and @file{check_money.c}, and then delete the originals.
We set up a directory structure as follows:
@example
@verbatim
.
|-- Makefile.am
|-- README
|-- configure.ac
|-- src
| |-- Makefile.am
| |-- main.c
| |-- money.c
| `-- money.h
`-- tests
|-- Makefile.am
`-- check_money.c
@end verbatim
@end example
Note that this is the output of @command{tree}, a great directory
visualization tool. The top-level @file{Makefile.am} is simple; it
merely tells Automake how to process sub-directories:
@example
@verbatim
SUBDIRS = src . tests
@end verbatim
@end example
Note that @code{tests} comes last, because the code should be testing
an already compiled library. @file{configure.ac} is standard Autoconf
boilerplate, as specified by the Autotools tutorial and as suggested
by @command{autoscan}.
@file{src/Makefile.am} builds @samp{libmoney} as a Libtool archive,
and links it to an application simply called @command{main}. The
application's behavior is not important to this tutorial; what's
important is that none of the functions we want to unit test appear in
@file{main.c}; this probably means that the only function in
@file{main.c} should be @code{main()} itself. In order to test the
whole application, unit testing is not appropriate: you should use a
system testing tool like Autotest. If you really want to test
@code{main()} using Check, rename it to something like
@code{_myproject_main()} and write a wrapper around it.
The primary build instructions for our unit tests are in
@file{tests/Makefile.am}:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude example/tests/Makefile.am
@end example
@end cartouche
@code{TESTS} tells Automake which test programs to run for
@command{make check}. Similarly, the @code{check_} prefix in
@code{check_PROGRAMS} actually comes from Automake; it says to build
these programs only when @command{make check} is run. (Recall that
Automake's @code{check} target is the origin of Check's name.) The
@command{check_money} test is a program that we will build from
@file{tests/check_money.c}, linking it against both
@file{src/libmoney.la} and the installed @file{libcheck.la} on our
system. The appropriate compiler and linker flags for using Check are
found in @code{@@CHECK_CFLAGS@@} and @code{@@CHECK_LIBS@@}, values
defined by the @code{AM_PATH_CHECK} macro.
Now that all this infrastructure is out of the way, we can get on with
development. @file{src/money.h} should only contain standard C header
boilerplate:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude example/src/money.1.h
@end example
@end cartouche
@file{src/money.c} should be empty, and @file{tests/check_money.c}
should only contain an empty @code{main()} function:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude example/tests/check_money.1.c
@end example
@end cartouche
Create the GNU Build System for the project and then build @file{main}
and @file{libmoney.la} as follows:
@example
@verbatim
$ autoreconf --install
$ ./configure
$ make
@end verbatim
@end example
(@command{autoreconf} determines which commands are needed in order
for @command{configure} to be created or brought up to date.
Previously one would use a script called @command{autogen.sh} or
@command{bootstrap}, but that practice is unnecessary now.)
Now build and run the @command{check_money} test with @command{make
check}. If all goes well, @command{make} should report that our tests
passed. No surprise, because there aren't any tests to fail. If you
have problems, make sure to see @ref{Supported Build Systems}.
This was tested on the isadora distribution of Linux Mint
GNU/Linux in November 2012, using Autoconf 2.65, Automake 1.11.1,
and Libtool 2.2.6b. Please report any problems to
@email{check-devel AT lists.sourceforge.net}.
@node Setting Up the Money Build Using CMake, Test a Little, Setting Up the Money Build Using Autotools, Tutorial
@section Setting Up the Money Build Using CMake
Since we are creating a library to handle money, we will first create
an interface in @file{money.h}, an implementation in @file{money.c},
and a place to store our unit tests, @file{check_money.c}. We want to
integrate these core files into our build system, and will need some
additional structure. To manage everything we'll use CMake for this
example. Note that one could do something similar with ordinary
Makefiles, or any other build system. It is in the authors' opinion that
it is generally easier to use CMake than bare Makefiles, and they
provide built-in support for running tests.
Note that this is not the place to explain how CMake works. If
you need help understanding what's going on beyond the explanations
here, the best place to start is probably the @uref{http://www.cmake.org,
CMake project's homepage}.
The examples in this section are part of the Check distribution; you
don't need to spend time cutting and pasting or (worse) retyping them.
Locate the Check documentation on your system and look in the
@samp{example} directory, or look in the Check source. If on a GNU/Linux
system the standard directory should be @samp{/usr/share/doc/check/example}.
This directory contains the final version reached the end of the tutorial. If
you want to follow along, create backups of @file{money.h},
@file{money.c}, and @file{check_money.c}, and then delete the originals.
We set up a directory structure as follows:
@example
@verbatim
.
|-- Makefile.am
|-- README
|-- CMakeLists.txt
|-- cmake
| |-- config.h.in
| |-- FindCheck.cmake
|-- src
| |-- CMakeLists.txt
| |-- main.c
| |-- money.c
| `-- money.h
`-- tests
|-- CMakeLists.txt
`-- check_money.c
@end verbatim
@end example
The top-level @file{CMakeLists.txt} contains the configuration checks
for available libraries and types, and also defines sub-directories
to process. The @file{cmake/FindCheck.cmake} file contains instructions
for locating Check on the system and setting up the build to use it.
If the system does not have pkg-config installed, @file{cmake/FindCheck.cmake}
may not be able to locate Check successfully. In this case, the install
directory of Check must be located manually, and the following line
added to @file{tests/CMakeLists.txt} (assuming Check was installed under
C:\\Program Files\\check:
@verbatim
set(CHECK_INSTALL_DIR "C:/Program Files/check")
@end verbatim
Note that @code{tests} comes last, because the code should be testing
an already compiled library.
@file{src/CMakeLists.txt} builds @samp{libmoney} as an archive,
and links it to an application simply called @command{main}. The
application's behavior is not important to this tutorial; what's
important is that none of the functions we want to unit test appear in
@file{main.c}; this probably means that the only function in
@file{main.c} should be @code{main()} itself. In order to test the
whole application, unit testing is not appropriate: you should use a
system testing tool like Autotest. If you really want to test
@code{main()} using Check, rename it to something like
@code{_myproject_main()} and write a wrapper around it.
Now that all this infrastructure is out of the way, we can get on with
development. @file{src/money.h} should only contain standard C header
boilerplate:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude example/src/money.1.h
@end example
@end cartouche
@file{src/money.c} should be empty, and @file{tests/check_money.c}
should only contain an empty @code{main()} function:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude example/tests/check_money.1.c
@end example
@end cartouche
Create the CMake Build System for the project and then build @file{main}
and @file{libmoney.la} as follows for Unix-compatible systems:
@example
@verbatim
$ cmake .
$ make
@end verbatim
@end example
and for MSVC on Windows:
@example
@verbatim
$ cmake -G "NMake Makefiles" .
$ nmake
@end verbatim
@end example
Now build and run the @command{check_money} test, with either @command{make
test} on a Unix-compatible system or @command{nmake test} if on Windows using MSVC.
If all goes well, the command should report that our tests
passed. No surprise, because there aren't any tests to fail.
This was tested on Windows 7 using CMake 2.8.12.1 and MSVC 16.00.30319.01/
Visual Studios 10 in February 2014. Please report any problems to
@email{check-devel AT lists.sourceforge.net}.
@node Test a Little, Creating a Suite, Setting Up the Money Build Using CMake, Tutorial
@section Test a Little, Code a Little
The @uref{http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/testinfected/testing.htm,
Test Infected} article starts out with a @code{Money} class, and so
will we. Of course, we can't do classes with C, but we don't really
need to. The Test Infected approach to writing code says that we
should write the unit test @emph{before} we write the code, and in
this case, we will be even more dogmatic and doctrinaire than the
authors of Test Infected (who clearly don't really get this stuff,
only being some of the originators of the Patterns approach to
software development and OO design).
Here are the changes to @file{check_money.c} for our first unit test:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude check_money.1-2.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
@findex ck_assert_int_eq
@findex ck_assert_str_eq
A unit test should just chug along and complete. If it exits early,
or is signaled, it will fail with a generic error message. (Note: it
is conceivable that you expect an early exit, or a signal and there is
functionality in Check to specifically assert that we should expect a
signal or an early exit.) If we want to get some information
about what failed, we need to use some calls that will point out a failure.
Two such calls are @code{ck_assert_int_eq} (used to determine if two integers
are equal) and @code{ck_assert_str_eq} (used to determine if two null terminated
strings are equal). Both of these functions (actually macros) will signal an error
if their arguments are not equal.
@findex ck_assert
An alternative to using @code{ck_assert_int_eq} and @code{ck_assert_str_eq}
is to write the expression under test directly using @code{ck_assert}.
This takes one Boolean argument which must be True for the check to pass.
The second test could be rewritten as follows:
@example
@verbatim
ck_assert(strcmp (money_currency (m), "USD") == 0);
@end verbatim
@end example
@findex ck_assert_msg
@code{ck_assert} will find and report failures, but will not print any
user supplied message in the unit test result. To print a user defined
message along with any failures found, use @code{ck_assert_msg}. The first
argument is a Boolean argument. The remaining arguments support @code{varargs}
and accept @code{printf}-style format strings and arguments. This is especially
useful while debugging. For example, the second test could be rewritten as:
@example
@verbatim
ck_assert_msg(strcmp (money_currency (m), "USD") == 0,
"Was expecting a currency of USD, but found %s", money_currency (m));
@end verbatim
@end example
@findex ck_abort
@findex ck_abort_msg
If the Boolean argument is too complicated to elegantly express within
@code{ck_assert()}, there are the alternate functions @code{ck_abort()}
and @code{ck_abort_msg()} that unconditionally fail. The second test inside
@code{test_money_create} above could be rewritten as follows:
@example
@verbatim
if (strcmp (money_currency (m), "USD") != 0)
{
ck_abort_msg ("Currency not set correctly on creation");
}
@end verbatim
@end example
For your convenience ck_assert, which does not accept a user supplied message,
substitutes a suitable message for you. (This is also equivalent to
passing a NULL message to ck_assert_msg). So you could also
write a test as follows:
@example
@verbatim
ck_assert (money_amount (m) == 5);
@end verbatim
@end example
This is equivalent to:
@example
@verbatim
ck_assert_msg (money_amount (m) == 5, NULL);
@end verbatim
@end example
which will print the file, line number, and the message
@code{"Assertion 'money_amount (m) == 5' failed"} if
@code{money_amount (m) != 5}.
When we try to compile and run the test suite now using @command{make
check}, we get a whole host of compilation errors. It may seem a bit
strange to deliberately write code that won't compile, but notice what
we are doing: in creating the unit test, we are also defining
requirements for the money interface. Compilation errors are, in a
way, unit test failures of their own, telling us that the
implementation does not match the specification. If all we do is edit
the sources so that the unit test compiles, we are actually making
progress, guided by the unit tests, so that's what we will now do.
We will patch our header @file{money.h} as follows:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude money.1-2.h.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
Our code compiles now, and again passes all of the tests. However,
once we try to @emph{use} the functions in @code{libmoney} in the
@code{main()} of @code{check_money}, we'll run into more problems, as
they haven't actually been implemented yet.
@node Creating a Suite, SRunner Output, Test a Little, Tutorial
@section Creating a Suite
To run unit tests with Check, we must create some test cases,
aggregate them into a suite, and run them with a suite runner. That's
a bit of overhead, but it is mostly one-off. Here's a diff for the
new version of @file{check_money.c}. Note that we include stdlib.h to
get the definitions of @code{EXIT_SUCCESS} and @code{EXIT_FAILURE}.
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude check_money.2-3.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
Most of the @code{money_suite()} code should be self-explanatory. We are
creating a suite, creating a test case, adding the test case to the
suite, and adding the unit test we created above to the test case.
Why separate this off into a separate function, rather than inline it
in @code{main()}? Because any new tests will get added in
@code{money_suite()}, but nothing will need to change in @code{main()}
for the rest of this example, so main will stay relatively clean and
simple.
Unit tests are internally defined as static functions. This means
that the code to add unit tests to test cases must be in the same
compilation unit as the unit tests themselves. This provides another
reason to put the creation of the test suite in a separate function:
you may later want to keep one source file per suite; defining a
uniquely named suite creation function allows you later to define a
header file giving prototypes for all the suite creation functions,
and encapsulate the details of where and how unit tests are defined
behind those functions. See the test program defined for Check itself
for an example of this strategy.
The code in @code{main()} bears some explanation. We are creating a
suite runner object of type @code{SRunner} from the @code{Suite} we
created in @code{money_suite()}. We then run the suite, using the
@code{CK_NORMAL} flag to specify that we should print a summary of the
run, and list any failures that may have occurred. We capture the
number of failures that occurred during the run, and use that to
decide how to return. The @code{check} target created by Automake
uses the return value to decide whether the tests passed or failed.
Now that the tests are actually being run by @command{check_money}, we
encounter linker errors again we try out @code{make check}. Try it
for yourself and see. The reason is that the @file{money.c}
implementation of the @file{money.h} interface hasn't been created
yet. Let's go with the fastest solution possible and implement stubs
for each of the functions in @code{money.c}. Here is the diff:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude money.1-3.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
Note that we @code{#include <stdlib.h>} to get the definition of
@code{NULL}. Now, the code compiles and links when we run @code{make
check}, but our unit test fails. Still, this is progress, and we can
focus on making the test pass.
@node SRunner Output, , Creating a Suite, Tutorial
@section SRunner Output
@findex srunner_run_all
@findex srunner_run
The functions to run tests in an @code{SRunner} are defined as follows:
@example
@verbatim
void srunner_run_all (SRunner * sr, enum print_output print_mode);
void srunner_run (SRunner *sr, const char *sname, const char *tcname,
enum print_output print_mode);
@end verbatim
@end example
Those functions do two things:
@enumerate
@item
They run all of the unit tests for the selected test cases defined for
the selected suites in the SRunner, and collect the results in the
SRunner. The determination of the selected test cases and suites
depends on the specific function used.
@code{srunner_run_all} will run all the defined test cases of all
defined suites except if the environment variables @code{CK_RUN_CASE}
or @code{CK_RUN_SUITE} are defined. If defined, those variables shall
contain the name of a test suite or a test case, defining in that way
the selected suite/test case.
@code{srunner_run} will run the suite/case selected by the
@code{sname} and @code{tcname} parameters. A value of @code{NULL}
in some of those parameters means ``any suite/case''.
@item
They print the results according to the @code{print_mode} specified.
@end enumerate
For SRunners that have already been run, there is also a separate
printing function defined as follows:
@example
@verbatim
void srunner_print (SRunner *sr, enum print_output print_mode);
@end verbatim
@end example
The enumeration values of @code{print_output} defined in Check that
parameter @code{print_mode} can assume are as follows:
@table @code
@vindex CK_SILENT
@item CK_SILENT
Specifies that no output is to be generated. If you use this flag, you
either need to programmatically examine the SRunner object, print
separately, or use test logging (@pxref{Test Logging}.)
@vindex CK_MINIMAL
@item CK_MINIMAL
Only a summary of the test run will be printed (number run, passed,
failed, errors).
@vindex CK_NORMAL
@item CK_NORMAL
Prints the summary of the run, and prints one message per failed
test.
@vindex CK_VERBOSE
@item CK_VERBOSE
Prints the summary, and one message per test (passed or failed)
@vindex CK_ENV
@vindex CK_VERBOSITY
@item CK_ENV
Gets the print mode from the environment variable @code{CK_VERBOSITY},
which can have the values "silent", "minimal", "normal", "verbose". If
the variable is not found or the value is not recognized, the print
mode is set to @code{CK_NORMAL}.
@vindex CK_SUBUNIT
@item CK_SUBUNIT
Prints running progress through the @uref{https://launchpad.net/subunit/,
subunit} test runner protocol. See 'subunit support' under the Advanced Features section for more information.
@end table
With the @code{CK_NORMAL} flag specified in our @code{main()}, let's
rerun @code{make check} now. The output from the unit test is as follows:
@example
@verbatim
Running suite(s): Money
0%: Checks: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0
check_money.c:9:F:Core:test_money_create:0: Assertion 'money_amount (m)==5' failed:
money_amount (m)==0, 5==5
FAIL: check_money
=====================================================
1 of 1 test failed
Please report to check-devel AT lists.sourceforge.net
=====================================================
@end verbatim
@end example
Note that the output from @code{make check} prior to Automake 1.13 will
be the output of the unit test program. Starting with 1.13 Automake will
run all unit test programs concurrently and store the output in
log files. The output listed above should be present in a log file.
The first number in the summary line tells us that 0% of our tests
passed, and the rest of the line tells us that there was one check in
total, and of those checks, one failure and zero errors. The next
line tells us exactly where that failure occurred, and what kind of
failure it was (P for pass, F for failure, E for error).
After that we have some higher level output generated by Automake: the
@code{check_money} program failed, and the bug-report address given in
@file{configure.ac} is printed.
Let's implement the @code{money_amount} function, so that it will pass
its tests. We first have to create a Money structure to hold the
amount, and then implement the function to return the correct amount:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude money.3-4.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
We will now rerun make check and@dots{} what's this? The output is
now as follows:
@example
@verbatim
Running suite(s): Money
0%: Checks: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1
check_money.c:5:E:Core:test_money_create:0: (after this point)
Received signal 11 (Segmentation fault)
@end verbatim
@end example
@findex mark_point
What does this mean? Note that we now have an error, rather than a
failure. This means that our unit test either exited early, or was
signaled. Next note that the failure message says ``after this
point''; This means that somewhere after the point noted
(@file{check_money.c}, line 5) there was a problem: signal 11 (a.k.a.
segmentation fault). The last point reached is set on entry to the
unit test, and after every call to the @code{ck_assert()},
@code{ck_abort()}, @code{ck_assert_int_*()}, @code{ck_assert_str_*()},
or the special function @code{mark_point()}. For example, if we wrote some test
code as follows:
@example
@verbatim
stuff_that_works ();
mark_point ();
stuff_that_dies ();
@end verbatim
@end example
then the point returned will be that marked by @code{mark_point()}.
The reason our test failed so horribly is that we haven't implemented
@code{money_create()} to create any @code{Money}. We'll go ahead and
implement that, the symmetric @code{money_free()}, and
@code{money_currency()} too, in order to make our unit test pass again,
here is a diff:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude money.4-5.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
@node Advanced Features, Supported Build Systems, Tutorial, Top
@chapter Advanced Features
What you've seen so far is all you need for basic unit testing. The
features described in this section are additions to Check that make it
easier for the developer to write, run, and analyze tests.
@menu
* Convenience Test Functions::
* Running Multiple Cases::
* No Fork Mode::
* Test Fixtures::
* Multiple Suites in one SRunner::
* Selective Running of Tests::
* Selecting Tests by Suite or Test Case::
* Selecting Tests Based on Arbitrary Tags::
* Testing Signal Handling and Exit Values::
* Looping Tests::
* Test Timeouts::
* Determining Test Coverage::
* Finding Memory Leaks::
* Test Logging::
* Subunit Support::
@end menu
@node Convenience Test Functions, Running Multiple Cases, Advanced Features, Advanced Features
@section Convenience Test Functions
Using the @code{ck_assert} function for all tests can lead to lot of
repetitive code that is hard to read. For your convenience Check
provides a set of functions (actually macros) for testing often used
conditions.
@findex check_set_max_msg_size
@vindex CK_MAX_MSG_SIZE
The typical size of an assertion message is less than 80 bytes.
However, some of the functions listed below can generate very large messages
(up to 4GB allocations were seen in the wild).
To prevent this, a limit is placed on the assertion message size.
This limit is 4K bytes by default.
It can be modified by setting the @code{CK_MAX_MSG_SIZE} environment variable,
or, if it is not set, by invoking the @code{check_set_max_msg_size()} function.
If used, this function must be called, once, before the first assertion.
@ftable @code
@item ck_abort
Unconditionally fails test with default message.
@item ck_abort_msg
Unconditionally fails test with user supplied message.
@item ck_assert
Fails test if supplied condition evaluates to false.
@item ck_assert_msg
Fails test if supplied condition evaluates to false and displays user
provided message.
@item ck_assert_int_eq
@itemx ck_assert_int_ne
@itemx ck_assert_int_lt
@itemx ck_assert_int_le
@itemx ck_assert_int_gt
@itemx ck_assert_int_ge
Compares two signed integer values (@code{intmax_t}) and displays a predefined
message with both the condition and input parameters on failure. The
operator used for comparison is different for each function and is indicated
by the last two letters of the function name. The abbreviations @code{eq},
@code{ne}, @code{lt}, @code{le}, @code{gt}, and @code{ge} correspond to
@code{==}, @code{!=}, @code{<}, @code{<=}, @code{>}, and @code{>=}
respectively.
@item ck_assert_uint_eq
@itemx ck_assert_uint_ne
@itemx ck_assert_uint_lt
@itemx ck_assert_uint_le
@itemx ck_assert_uint_gt
@itemx ck_assert_uint_ge
Similar to @code{ck_assert_int_*}, but compares two unsigned integer values
(@code{uintmax_t}) instead.
@item ck_assert_float_eq
@itemx ck_assert_float_ne
@itemx ck_assert_float_lt
@itemx ck_assert_float_le
@itemx ck_assert_float_gt
@itemx ck_assert_float_ge
Compares two floating point numbers (@code{float}) and displays a predefined
message with both the condition and input parameters on failure.
The operator used for comparison is different for each function
and is indicated by the last two letters of the function name.
The abbreviations @code{eq}, @code{ne}, @code{lt}, @code{le}, @code{gt},
and @code{ge} correspond to @code{==}, @code{!=}, @code{<}, @code{<=}, @code{>},
and @code{>=} respectively.
Beware using those operators for floating point numbers because of precision
possible loss on every operation on floating point numbers. For example
(1/3)*3==1 would return false, because 1/3==1.333... (or 1.(3) notation
in Europe) and cannot be represented by computer logic. As another example
1.1f in fact could be 1.10000002384185791015625 and 2.1f could be
2.099999904632568359375 because of binary representation of floating
point numbers.
If you have different mathematical operations used on floating point numbers
consider using precision comparisons or integer numbers instead. But in some
cases those operators could be used. For example if you cyclically increment
your floating point number only by positive or only by negative values than
you may use @code{<}, @code{<=}, @code{>} and @code{>=} operators in tests.
If your computations must end up with a certain value than @code{==} and
@code{!=} operators may be used.
@item ck_assert_double_eq
@itemx ck_assert_double_ne
@itemx ck_assert_double_lt
@itemx ck_assert_double_le
@itemx ck_assert_double_gt
@itemx ck_assert_double_ge
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_*}, but compares two double precision
floating point values (@code{double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_ldouble_eq
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_ne
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_lt
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_le
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_gt
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_ge
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_*}, but compares two double precision
floating point values (@code{long double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_float_eq_tol
@itemx ck_assert_float_ne_tol
@itemx ck_assert_float_le_tol
@itemx ck_assert_float_ge_tol
Compares two floating point numbers (@code{float}) with specified user tolerance
set by the third parameter (@code{float}) and displays a predefined message
with both the condition and input parameters on failure.
The abbreviations @code{eq}, @code{ne}, @code{le}, and @code{ge} correspond
to @code{==}, @code{!=}, @code{<=}, and @code{>=} respectively with acceptable
error (tolerance) specified by the last parameter.
Beware using those functions for floating comparisons because of
(1) errors coming from floating point number representation,
(2) rounding errors,
(3) floating point errors are platform dependent.
Floating point numbers are often internally represented in binary
so they cannot be exact power of 10. All these operators have significant
error in comparisons so use them only if you know what you're doing.
Some assertions could fail on one platform and would be passed on another.
For example expression @code{0.02<=0.01+10^-2} is true by meaning,
but some platforms may calculate it as false. IEEE 754 standard specifies
the floating point number format representation but it does not promise that
the same computation carried out on all hardware will produce the same result.
@item ck_assert_double_eq_tol
@itemx ck_assert_double_ne_tol
@itemx ck_assert_double_le_tol
@itemx ck_assert_double_ge_tol
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_*_tol}, but compares two double precision
floating point values (@code{double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_ldouble_eq_tol
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_ne_tol
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_le_tol
@itemx ck_assert_ldouble_ge_tol
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_*_tol}, but compares two double precision
floating point values (@code{long double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_float_finite
Checks that a floating point number (@code{float}) is finite and displays
a predefined message with both the condition and input parameter on failure.
Finite means that value cannot be positive infinity, negative infinity
or NaN ("Not a Number").
@item ck_assert_double_finite
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_finite}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_ldouble_finite
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_finite}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{long double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_float_infinite
Checks that a floating point number (@code{float}) is infinite and displays
a predefined message with both the condition and input parameter on failure.
Infinite means that value may only be positive infinity or negative infinity.
@item ck_assert_double_infinite
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_infinite}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_ldouble_infinite
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_infinite}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{long double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_float_nan
Checks that a floating point number (@code{float}, @code{double} or
@code{long double} abbreviated as @code{ldouble}) is NaN ("Not a Number")
and displays a predefined message with both the condition and input parameter
on failure.
@item ck_assert_double_nan
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_nan}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_ldouble_nan
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_nan}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{long double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_float_nonnan
Checks that a floating point number (@code{float}) is not NaN ("Not a Number")
and displays a predefined message with both the condition and input parameter
on failure.
@item ck_assert_double_nonnan
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_nonnan}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_ldouble_nonnan
Similar to @code{ck_assert_float_nonnan}, but checks double precision
floating point value (@code{long double}) instead.
@item ck_assert_str_eq
@itemx ck_assert_str_ne
@itemx ck_assert_str_lt
@itemx ck_assert_str_le
@itemx ck_assert_str_gt
@itemx ck_assert_str_ge
Compares two null-terminated @code{char *} string values, using the
@code{strcmp()} function internally, and displays predefined message
with condition and input parameter values on failure. The comparison
operator is again indicated by last two letters of the function name.
@code{ck_assert_str_lt(a, b)} will pass if the unsigned numerical value
of the character string @code{a} is less than that of @code{b}.
If a NULL pointer is be passed to any comparison macro the check will fail.
@item ck_assert_pstr_eq
@itemx ck_assert_pstr_ne
Similar to @code{ck_assert_str_*} macros, but able to check undefined strings.
If a NULL pointer would be passed to a comparison macro it would mean that
a string is undefined. If both strings are undefined @code{ck_assert_pstr_eq}
would pass, but @code{ck_assert_pstr_ne} would fail. If only one of strings is
undefined @code{ck_assert_pstr_eq} macro would fail and @code{ck_assert_pstr_ne}
would pass.
@item ck_assert_ptr_eq
@itemx ck_assert_ptr_ne
Compares two pointers and displays predefined message with
condition and values of both input parameters on failure. The operator
used for comparison is different for each function and is indicated by
the last two letters of the function name. The abbreviations @code{eq} and
@code{ne} correspond to @code{==} and @code{!=} respectively.
@item ck_assert_ptr_null
@itemx ck_assert_ptr_nonnull
Compares a pointers against null and displays predefined message with
condition and value of the input parameter on failure.
@code{ck_assert_ptr_null} checks that pointer is equal to NULL and
@code{ck_assert_ptr_nonnull} checks that pointer is not equal to NULL.
@code{ck_assert_ptr_nonnull} is highly recommended to use in situations
when a function call can return NULL as error indication (like functions
that use malloc, calloc, strdup, mmap, etc).
@item ck_assert_mem_eq
@itemx ck_assert_mem_ne
@itemx ck_assert_mem_lt
@itemx ck_assert_mem_le
@itemx ck_assert_mem_gt
@itemx ck_assert_mem_ge
Compares contents of two memory locations of the given length, using the
@code{memcmp()} function internally, and displays predefined message
with condition and input parameter values on failure. The comparison
operator is again indicated by last two letters of the function name.
@code{ck_assert_mem_lt(a, b)} will pass if the unsigned numerical value
of memory location @code{a} is less than that of @code{b}.
@item fail
(Deprecated) Unconditionally fails test with user supplied message.
@item fail_if
(Deprecated) Fails test if supplied condition evaluates to true and
displays user provided message.
@item fail_unless
(Deprecated) Fails test if supplied condition evaluates to false and
displays user provided message.
@end ftable
@node Running Multiple Cases, No Fork Mode, Convenience Test Functions, Advanced Features
@section Running Multiple Cases
What happens if we pass @code{-1} as the @code{amount} in
@code{money_create()}? What should happen? Let's write a unit test.
Since we are now testing limits, we should also test what happens when
we create @code{Money} where @code{amount == 0}. Let's put these in a
separate test case called ``Limits'' so that @code{money_suite} is
changed like so:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude check_money.3-6.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
Now we can rerun our suite, and fix the problem(s). Note that errors
in the ``Core'' test case will be reported as ``Core'', and errors in
the ``Limits'' test case will be reported as ``Limits'', giving you
additional information about where things broke.
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude money.5-6.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
@node No Fork Mode, Test Fixtures, Running Multiple Cases, Advanced Features
@section No Fork Mode
Check normally forks to create a separate address space. This allows
a signal or early exit to be caught and reported, rather than taking
down the entire test program, and is normally very useful. However,
when you are trying to debug why the segmentation fault or other
program error occurred, forking makes it difficult to use debugging
tools. To define fork mode for an @code{SRunner} object, you can do
one of the following:
@vindex CK_FORK
@findex srunner_set_fork_status
@enumerate
@item
Define the CK_FORK environment variable to equal ``no''.
@item
Explicitly define the fork status through the use of the following
function:
@verbatim
void srunner_set_fork_status (SRunner * sr, enum fork_status fstat);
@end verbatim
@end enumerate
The enum @code{fork_status} allows the @code{fstat} parameter to
assume the following values: @code{CK_FORK} and @code{CK_NOFORK}. An
explicit call to @code{srunner_set_fork_status()} overrides the
@code{CK_FORK} environment variable.
@node Test Fixtures, Multiple Suites in one SRunner, No Fork Mode, Advanced Features
@section Test Fixtures
We may want multiple tests that all use the same Money. In such
cases, rather than setting up and tearing down objects for each unit
test, it may be convenient to add some setup that is constant across
all the tests in a test case. Each such setup/teardown pair is called
a @dfn{test fixture} in test-driven development jargon.
A fixture is created by defining a setup and/or a teardown function,
and associating it with a test case. There are two kinds of test
fixtures in Check: checked and unchecked fixtures. These are defined
as follows:
@table @asis
@item Checked fixtures
are run inside the address space created by the fork to create the
unit test. Before each unit test in a test case, the @code{setup()}
function is run, if defined. After each unit test, the
@code{teardown()} function is run, if defined. Since they run inside
the forked address space, if checked fixtures signal or otherwise
fail, they will be caught and reported by the @code{SRunner}. A
checked @code{teardown()} fixture will not run if the unit test
fails.
@item Unchecked fixtures
are run in the same address space as the test program. Therefore they
may not signal or exit, but may use the fail functions. The unchecked
@code{setup()}, if defined, is run before the test case is
started. The unchecked @code{teardown()}, if defined, is run after the
test case is done. An unchecked @code{teardown()} fixture will run even
if a unit test fails.
@end table
An important difference is that the checked fixtures are run once per
unit test and the unchecked fixtures are run once per test case.
So for a test case that contains @code{check_one()} and
@code{check_two()} unit tests,
@code{checked_setup()}/@code{checked_teardown()} checked fixtures, and
@code{unchecked_setup()}/@code{unchecked_teardown()} unchecked
fixtures, the control flow would be:
@example
@verbatim
unchecked_setup();
fork();
checked_setup();
check_one();
checked_teardown();
wait();
fork();
checked_setup();
check_two();
checked_teardown();
wait();
unchecked_teardown();
@end verbatim
@end example
@menu
* Test Fixture Examples::
* Checked vs Unchecked Fixtures::
@end menu
@node Test Fixture Examples, Checked vs Unchecked Fixtures, Test Fixtures, Test Fixtures
@subsection Test Fixture Examples
We create a test fixture in Check as follows:
@enumerate
@item
Define global variables, and functions to setup and teardown the
globals. The functions both take @code{void} and return @code{void}.
In our example, we'll make @code{five_dollars} be a global created and
freed by @code{setup()} and @code{teardown()} respectively.
@item
@findex tcase_add_checked_fixture
Add the @code{setup()} and @code{teardown()} functions to the test
case with @code{tcase_add_checked_fixture()}. In our example, this
belongs in the suite setup function @code{money_suite}.
@item
Rewrite tests to use the globals. We'll rewrite our first to use
@code{five_dollars}.
@end enumerate
Note that the functions used for setup and teardown do not need to be
named @code{setup()} and @code{teardown()}, but they must take
@code{void} and return @code{void}. We'll update @file{check_money.c}
with the following patch:
@cartouche
@example
@verbatiminclude check_money.6-7.c.diff
@end example
@end cartouche
@node Checked vs Unchecked Fixtures, , Test Fixture Examples, Test Fixtures
@subsection Checked vs Unchecked Fixtures
Checked fixtures run once for each unit test in a test case, and so
they should not be used for expensive setup. However, if a checked
fixture fails and @code{CK_FORK} mode is being used, it will not bring
down the entire framework.
On the other hand, unchecked fixtures run once for an entire test
case, as opposed to once per unit test, and so can be used for
expensive setup. However, since they may take down the entire test
program, they should only be used if they are known to be safe.
Additionally, the isolation of objects created by unchecked fixtures
is not guaranteed by @code{CK_NOFORK} mode. Normally, in
@code{CK_FORK} mode, unit tests may abuse the objects created in an
unchecked fixture with impunity, without affecting other unit tests in
the same test case, because the fork creates a separate address space.
However, in @code{CK_NOFORK} mode, all tests live in the same address
space, and side effects in one test will affect the unchecked fixture
for the other tests.
A checked fixture will generally not be affected by unit test side
effects, since the @code{setup()} is run before each unit test. There
is an exception for side effects to the total environment in which the
test program lives: for example, if the @code{setup()} function
initializes a file that a unit test then changes, the combination of
the @code{teardown()} function and @code{setup()} function must be able
to restore the environment for the next unit test.
If the @code{setup()} function in a fixture fails, in either checked
or unchecked fixtures, the unit tests for the test case, and the
@code{teardown()} function for the fixture will not be run. A fixture
error will be created and reported to the @code{SRunner}.
@node Multiple Suites in one SRunner, Selective Running of Tests, Test Fixtures, Advanced Features
@section Multiple Suites in one SRunner
In a large program, it will be convenient to create multiple suites,
each testing a module of the program. While one can create several
test programs, each running one @code{Suite}, it may be convenient to
create one main test program, and use it to run multiple suites. The
Check test suite provides an example of how to do this. The main
testing program is called @code{check_check}, and has a header file
that declares suite creation functions for all the module tests:
@example
@verbatim
Suite *make_sub_suite (void);
Suite *make_sub2_suite (void);
Suite *make_master_suite (void);
Suite *make_list_suite (void);
Suite *make_msg_suite (void);
Suite *make_log_suite (void);
Suite *make_limit_suite (void);
Suite *make_fork_suite (void);
Suite *make_fixture_suite (void);
Suite *make_pack_suite (void);
@end verbatim
@end example
@findex srunner_add_suite
The function @code{srunner_add_suite()} is used to add additional
suites to an @code{SRunner}. Here is the code that sets up and runs
the @code{SRunner} in the @code{main()} function in
@file{check_check_main.c}:
@example
@verbatim
SRunner *sr;
sr = srunner_create (make_master_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_list_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_msg_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_log_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_limit_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_fork_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_fixture_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_pack_suite ());
@end verbatim
@end example
@node Selective Running of Tests, Testing Signal Handling and Exit Values, Multiple Suites in one SRunner, Advanced Features
@section Selective Running of Tests
After adding a couple of suites and some test cases in each, it is
sometimes practical to be able to run only one suite, or one specific
test case, without recompiling the test code. Check provides two ways
to accomplish this, either by specifying a suite or test case by name
or by assigning tags to test cases and specifying one or more tags to
run.
@menu
* Selecting Tests by Suite or Test Case::
* Selecting Tests Based on Arbitrary Tags::
@end menu
@node Selecting Tests by Suite or Test Case, Selecting Tests Based on Arbitrary Tags, Selective Running of Tests, Selective Running of Tests
@subsection Selecting Tests by Suite or Test Case
@vindex CK_RUN_SUITE
@vindex CK_RUN_CASE
There are two environment variables available that offer this
ability, @code{CK_RUN_SUITE} and @code{CK_RUN_CASE}. Just set the
value to the name of the suite and/or test case you want to run. These
environment variables can also be a good integration tool for running
specific tests from within another tool, e.g. an IDE.
@node Selecting Tests Based on Arbitrary Tags, ,Selecting Tests by Suite or Test Case, Selective Running of Tests
@subsection Selecting Tests Based on Arbitrary Tags
@vindex CK_INCLUDE_TAGS
@vindex CK_EXCLUDE_TAGS
It can be useful to dynamically include or exclude groups of tests to
be run based on criteria other than the suite or test case name. For
example, one or more tags can be assigned to test cases. The tags
could indicate if a test runs for a long time, so such tests could be
excluded in order to run quicker tests for a sanity
check. Alternately, tags may be used to indicate which functional
areas test cover. Tests can then be run that include all test cases
for a given set of functional areas.
In Check, a tag is a string of characters without white space. One or
more tags can be assigned to a test case by using the
@code{tcase_set_tags} function. This function accepts a string, and
multiple tags can be specified by delimiting them with spaces. For
example:
@example
@verbatim
Suite *s;
TCase *red, *blue, *purple, *yellow, *black;
s = suite_create("Check Tag Filtering");
red = tcase_create("Red");
tcase_set_tags(red, "Red");
suite_add_tcase (s, red);
tcase_add_test(red, red_test1);
blue = tcase_create("Blue");
tcase_set_tags(blue, "Blue");
suite_add_tcase (s, blue);
tcase_add_test(blue, blue_test1);
purple = tcase_create("Purple");
tcase_set_tags(purple, "Red Blue");
suite_add_tcase (s, purple);
tcase_add_test(purple, purple_test1);
@end verbatim
@end example
Once test cases are tagged they may be selectively run in one of two ways:
a) Using Environment Variables
There are two environment variables available for selecting test cases
based on tags: @code{CK_INCLUDE_TAGS} and
@code{CK_EXCLUDE_TAGS}. These can be set to a space separated list of
tag names. If @code{CK_INCLUDE_TAGS} is set then test cases which
include at least one tag in common with @code{CK_INCLUDE_TAGS} will be
run. If @code{CK_EXCLUDE_TAGS} is set then test cases with one tag in
common with @code{CK_EXCLUDE_TAGS} will not be run. In cases where
both @code{CK_INCLUDE_TAGS} and @code{CK_EXCLUDE_TAGS} match a tag for
a test case the test will be excluded.
Both @code{CK_INCLUDE_TAGS} and @code{CK_EXCLUDE_TAGS} can be
specified in conjunction with @code{CK_RUN_SUITE} or even
@code{CK_RUN_CASE} in which case they will have the effect of further
narrowing the selection.
b) Programmatically
The @code{srunner_run_tagged} function allows one to specify which
tags to run or exclude from a suite runner. This can be used to
programmatically control which test cases may run.
@node Testing Signal Handling and Exit Values, Looping Tests, Selective Running of Tests, Advanced Features
@section Testing Signal Handling and Exit Values
@findex tcase_add_test_raise_signal
To enable testing of signal handling, there is a function
@code{tcase_add_test_raise_signal()} which is used instead of
@code{tcase_add_test()}. This function takes an additional signal
argument, specifying a signal that the test expects to receive. If no
signal is received this is logged as a failure. If a different signal
is received this is logged as an error.
The signal handling functionality only works in CK_FORK mode.
@findex tcase_add_exit_test
To enable testing of expected exits, there is a function
@code{tcase_add_exit_test()} which is used instead of @code{tcase_add_test()}.
This function takes an additional expected exit value argument,
specifying a value that the test is expected to exit with. If the test
exits with any other value this is logged as a failure. If the test exits
early this is logged as an error.
The exit handling functionality only works in CK_FORK mode.
@node Looping Tests, Test Timeouts, Testing Signal Handling and Exit Values, Advanced Features
@section Looping Tests
Looping tests are tests that are called with a new context for each
loop iteration. This makes them ideal for table based tests. If
loops are used inside ordinary tests to test multiple values, only the
first error will be shown before the test exits. However, looping
tests allow for all errors to be shown at once, which can help out
with debugging.
@findex tcase_add_loop_test
Adding a normal test with @code{tcase_add_loop_test()} instead of
@code{tcase_add_test()} will make the test function the body of a
@code{for} loop, with the addition of a fork before each call. The
loop variable @code{_i} is available for use inside the test function;
for example, it could serve as an index into a table. For failures,
the iteration which caused the failure is available in error messages
and logs.
Start and end values for the loop are supplied when adding the test.
The values are used as in a normal @code{for} loop. Below is some
pseudo-code to show the concept:
@example
@verbatim
for (_i = tfun->loop_start; _i < tfun->loop_end; _i++)
{
fork(); /* New context */
tfun->f(_i); /* Call test function */
wait(); /* Wait for child to terminate */
}
@end verbatim
@end example
An example of looping test usage follows:
@example
@verbatim
static const int primes[5] = {2,3,5,7,11};
START_TEST (check_is_prime)
{
ck_assert (is_prime (primes[_i]));
}
END_TEST
...
tcase_add_loop_test (tcase, check_is_prime, 0, 5);
@end verbatim
@end example
Looping tests work in @code{CK_NOFORK} mode as well, but without the
forking. This means that only the first error will be shown.
@node Test Timeouts, Determining Test Coverage, Looping Tests, Advanced Features
@section Test Timeouts
@findex tcase_set_timeout
@vindex CK_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT
@vindex CK_TIMEOUT_MULTIPLIER
To be certain that a test won't hang indefinitely, all tests are run
with a timeout, the default being 4 seconds. If the test is not
finished within that time, it is killed and logged as an error.
The timeout for a specific test case, which may contain multiple unit
tests, can be changed with the @code{tcase_set_timeout()} function.
The default timeout used for all test cases can be changed with the
environment variable @code{CK_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT}, but this will not
override an explicitly set timeout. Another way to change the timeout
length is to use the @code{CK_TIMEOUT_MULTIPLIER} environment variable,
which multiplies all timeouts, including those set with
@code{tcase_set_timeout()}, with the supplied integer value. All timeout
arguments are in seconds and a timeout of 0 seconds turns off the timeout
functionality. On systems that support it, the timeout can be specified
using a nanosecond precision. Otherwise, second precision is used.
Test timeouts are only available in CK_FORK mode.
@node Determining Test Coverage, Finding Memory Leaks, Test Timeouts, Advanced Features
@section Determining Test Coverage
The term @dfn{code coverage} refers to the extent that the statements
of a program are executed during a run. Thus, @dfn{test coverage}
refers to code coverage when executing unit tests. This information
can help you to do two things:
@itemize
@item
Write better tests that more fully exercise your code, thereby
improving confidence in it.
@item
Detect dead code that could be factored away.
@end itemize
Check itself does not provide any means to determine this test
coverage; rather, this is the job of the compiler and its related
tools. In the case of @command{gcc} this information is easy to
obtain, and other compilers should provide similar facilities.
Using @command{gcc}, first enable test coverage profiling when
building your source by specifying the @option{-fprofile-arcs} and
@option{-ftest-coverage} switches:
@example
@verbatim
$ gcc -g -Wall -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage -o foo foo.c foo_check.c
@end verbatim
@end example
You will see that an additional @file{.gcno} file is created for each
@file{.c} input file. After running your tests the normal way, a
@file{.gcda} file is created for each @file{.gcno} file. These
contain the coverage data in a raw format. To combine this
information and a source file into a more readable format you can use
the @command{gcov} utility:
@example
@verbatim
$ gcov foo.c
@end verbatim
@end example
This will produce the file @file{foo.c.gcov} which looks like this:
@example
@verbatim
-: 41: * object */
18: 42: if (ht->table[p] != NULL) {
-: 43: /* replaces the current entry */
#####: 44: ht->count--;
#####: 45: ht->size -= ht->table[p]->size +
#####: 46: sizeof(struct hashtable_entry);
@end verbatim
@end example
As you can see this is an annotated source file with three columns:
usage information, line numbers, and the original source. The usage
information in the first column can either be '-', which means that
this line does not contain code that could be executed; '#####', which
means this line was never executed although it does contain
code---these are the lines that are probably most interesting for you;
or a number, which indicates how often that line was executed.
This is of course only a very brief overview, but it should illustrate
how determining test coverage generally works, and how it can help
you. For more information or help with other compilers, please refer
to the relevant manuals.
@node Finding Memory Leaks, Test Logging, Determining Test Coverage, Advanced Features
@section Finding Memory Leaks
It is possible to determine if any code under test leaks memory during
a test. Check itself does not have an API for memory leak detection,
however Valgrind can be used against a unit testing program to search
for potential leaks.
Before discussing memory leak detection, first a "memory leak" should be
better defined. There are two primary definitions of a memory leak:
@enumerate
@item
Memory that is allocated but not freed before a program terminates.
However, it was possible for the program to free the memory if it had
wanted to. Valgrind refers to these as "still reachable" leaks.
@item
Memory that is allocated, and any reference to the memory is lost.
The program could not have freed the memory. Valgrind refers to these
as "definitely lost" leaks.
@end enumerate
Valgrind uses the second definition by default when defining a memory leak.
These leaks are the ones which are likely to cause a program issues due
to heap depletion.
If one wanted to run Valgrind against a unit testing program to determine
if leaks are present, the following invocation of Valgrind will work:
@example
@verbatim
valgrind --leak-check=full ${UNIT_TEST_PROGRAM}
...
==3979== LEAK SUMMARY:
==3979== definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==3979== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==3979== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==3979== still reachable: 548 bytes in 24 blocks
==3979== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
@end verbatim
@end example
In that example, there were no "definitely lost" memory leaks found.
However, why would there be such a large number of "still reachable"
memory leaks? It turns out this is a consequence of using @code{fork()}
to run a unit test in its own process memory space, which Check does by
default on platforms with @code{fork()} available.
Consider the example where a unit test program creates one suite with
one test. The flow of the program will look like the following:
@example
@b{Main process:} @b{Unit test process:}
create suite
srunner_run_all()
fork unit test unit test process created
wait for test start test
... end test
... exit(0)
test complete
report result
free suite
exit(0)
@end example
The unit testing process has a copy of all memory that the main process
allocated. In this example, that would include the suite allocated in
main. When the unit testing process calls @code{exit(0)}, the suite
allocated in @code{main()} is reachable but not freed. As the unit test
has no reason to do anything besides die when its test is finished, and
it has no reasonable way to free everything before it dies, Valgrind
reports that some memory is still reachable but not freed.
If the "still reachable" memory leaks are a concern, and one required that
the unit test program report that there were no memory leaks regardless
of the type, then the unit test program needs to run without fork. To
accomplish this, either define the @code{CK_FORK=no} environment variable,
or use the @code{srunner_set_fork_status()} function to set the fork mode
as @code{CK_NOFORK} for all suite runners.
Running the same unit test program by disabling @code{fork()} results
in the following:
@example
@verbatim
CK_FORK=no valgrind --leak-check=full ${UNIT_TEST_PROGRAM}
...
==4924== HEAP SUMMARY:
==4924== in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==4924== total heap usage: 482 allocs, 482 frees, 122,351 bytes allocated
==4924==
==4924== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible
@end verbatim
@end example
@node Test Logging, Subunit Support, Finding Memory Leaks, Advanced Features
@section Test Logging
@findex srunner_set_log
Check supports an operation to log the results of a test run. To use
test logging, call the @code{srunner_set_log()} function with the name
of the log file you wish to create:
@example
@verbatim
SRunner *sr;
sr = srunner_create (make_s1_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_s2_suite ());
srunner_set_log (sr, "test.log");
srunner_run_all (sr, CK_NORMAL);
@end verbatim
@end example
In this example, Check will write the results of the run to
@file{test.log}. The @code{print_mode} argument to
@code{srunner_run_all()} is ignored during test logging; the log will
contain a result entry, organized by suite, for every test run. Here
is an example of test log output:
@example
@verbatim
Running suite S1
ex_log_output.c:8:P:Core:test_pass: Test passed
ex_log_output.c:14:F:Core:test_fail: Failure
ex_log_output.c:18:E:Core:test_exit: (after this point) Early exit
with return value 1
Running suite S2
ex_log_output.c:26:P:Core:test_pass2: Test passed
Results for all suites run:
50%: Checks: 4, Failures: 1, Errors: 1
@end verbatim
@end example
Another way to enable test logging is to use the @code{CK_LOG_FILE_NAME}
environment variable. When set tests will be logged to the specified file name.
If log file is specified with both @code{CK_LOG_FILE_NAME} and
@code{srunner_set_log()}, the name provided to @code{srunner_set_log()} will
be used.
If the log name is set to "-" either via @code{srunner_set_log()} or
@code{CK_LOG_FILE_NAME}, the log data will be printed to stdout instead
of to a file.
@menu
* XML Logging::
* TAP Logging::
@end menu
@node XML Logging, , Test Logging, Test Logging
@subsection XML Logging
@findex srunner_set_xml
@findex srunner_has_xml
@findex srunner_xml_fname
The log can also be written in XML. The following functions define
the interface for XML logs:
@example
@verbatim
void srunner_set_xml (SRunner *sr, const char *fname);
int srunner_has_xml (SRunner *sr);
const char *srunner_xml_fname (SRunner *sr);
@end verbatim
@end example
XML output is enabled by a call to @code{srunner_set_xml()} before the tests
are run. Here is an example of an XML log:
@example
@verbatim
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://check.sourceforge.net/xml/check_unittest.xslt"?>
<testsuites xmlns="http://check.sourceforge.net/ns">
<datetime>2012-10-19 09:56:06</datetime>
<suite>
<title>S1</title>
<test result="success">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:10</fn>
<id>test_pass</id>
<iteration>0</iteration>
<duration>0.000013</duration>
<description>Core</description>
<message>Passed</message>
</test>
<test result="failure">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:16</fn>
<id>test_fail</id>
<iteration>0</iteration>
<duration>-1.000000</duration>
<description>Core</description>
<message>Failure</message>
</test>
<test result="error">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:20</fn>
<id>test_exit</id>
<iteration>0</iteration>
<duration>-1.000000</duration>
<description>Core</description>
<message>Early exit with return value 1</message>
</test>
</suite>
<suite>
<title>S2</title>
<test result="success">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:28</fn>
<id>test_pass2</id>
<iteration>0</iteration>
<duration>0.000011</duration>
<description>Core</description>
<message>Passed</message>
</test>
<test result="failure">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:34</fn>
<id>test_loop</id>
<iteration>0</iteration>
<duration>-1.000000</duration>
<description>Core</description>
<message>Iteration 0 failed</message>
</test>
<test result="success">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:34</fn>
<id>test_loop</id>
<iteration>1</iteration>
<duration>0.000010</duration>
<description>Core</description>
<message>Passed</message>
</test>
<test result="failure">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:34</fn>
<id>test_loop</id>
<iteration>2</iteration>
<duration>-1.000000</duration>
<description>Core</description>
<message>Iteration 2 failed</message>
</test>
</suite>
<suite>
<title>XML escape " ' < > & tests</title>
<test result="failure">
<path>.</path>
<fn>ex_xml_output.c:40</fn>
<id>test_xml_esc_fail_msg</id>
<iteration>0</iteration>
<duration>-1.000000</duration>
<description>description " ' < > &</description>
<message>fail " ' < > & message</message>
</test>
</suite>
<duration>0.001610</duration>
</testsuites>
@end verbatim
@end example
XML logging can be enabled by an environment variable as well. If
@code{CK_XML_LOG_FILE_NAME} environment variable is set, the XML test log will
be written to specified file name. If XML log file is specified with both
@code{CK_XML_LOG_FILE_NAME} and @code{srunner_set_xml()}, the name provided
to @code{srunner_set_xml()} will be used.
If the log name is set to "-" either via @code{srunner_set_xml()} or
@code{CK_XML_LOG_FILE_NAME}, the log data will be printed to stdout instead
of to a file.
If both plain text and XML log files are specified, by any of above methods,
then check will log to both files. In other words logging in plain text and XML
format simultaneously is supported.
@node TAP Logging, , Test Logging, Test Logging
@subsection TAP Logging
@findex srunner_set_tap
@findex srunner_has_tap
@findex srunner_tap_fname
The log can also be written in Test Anything Protocol (TAP) format.
Refer to the @uref{http://podwiki.hexten.net/TAP/TAP.html,TAP Specification}
for information on valid TAP output and parsers of TAP. The following
functions define the interface for TAP logs:
@example
@verbatim
void srunner_set_tap (SRunner *sr, const char *fname);
int srunner_has_tap (SRunner *sr);
const char *srunner_tap_fname (SRunner *sr);
@end verbatim
@end example
TAP output is enabled by a call to @code{srunner_set_tap()} before the tests
are run. Here is an example of an TAP log:
@example
@verbatim
ok 1 - mytests.c:test_suite_name:my_test_1: Passed
ok 2 - mytests.c:test_suite_name:my_test_2: Passed
not ok 3 - mytests.c:test_suite_name:my_test_3: Foo happened
ok 4 - mytests.c:test_suite_name:my_test_1: Passed
1..4
@end verbatim
@end example
TAP logging can be enabled by an environment variable as well. If
@code{CK_TAP_LOG_FILE_NAME} environment variable is set, the TAP test log will
be written to specified file name. If TAP log file is specified with both
@code{CK_TAP_LOG_FILE_NAME} and @code{srunner_set_tap()}, the name provided
to @code{srunner_set_tap()} will be used.
If the log name is set to "-" either via @code{srunner_set_tap()} or
@code{CK_TAP_LOG_FILE_NAME}, the log data will be printed to stdout instead
of to a file.
If both plain text and TAP log files are specified, by any of above methods,
then check will log to both files. In other words logging in plain text and TAP
format simultaneously is supported.
@node Subunit Support, , Test Logging, Advanced Features
@section Subunit Support
Check supports running test suites with subunit output. This can be useful to
combine test results from multiple languages, or to perform programmatic
analysis on the results of multiple check test suites or otherwise handle test
results in a programmatic manner. Using subunit with check is very straight
forward. There are two steps:
1) In your check test suite driver pass 'CK_SUBUNIT' as the output mode
for your srunner.
@example
@verbatim
SRunner *sr;
sr = srunner_create (make_s1_suite ());
srunner_add_suite (sr, make_s2_suite ());
srunner_run_all (sr, CK_SUBUNIT);
@end verbatim
@end example
2) Setup your main language test runner to run your check based test
executable. For instance using python:
@example
@verbatim
import subunit
class ShellTests(subunit.ExecTestCase):
"""Run some tests from the C codebase."""
def test_group_one(self):
"""./foo/check_driver"""
def test_group_two(self):
"""./foo/other_driver"""
@end verbatim
@end example
In this example, running the test suite ShellTests in python (using any test
runner - unittest.py, tribunal, trial, nose or others) will run
./foo/check_driver and ./foo/other_driver and report on their result.
Subunit is hosted on launchpad - the @uref{https://launchpad.net/subunit/,
subunit} project there contains bug tracker, future plans, and source code
control details.
@node Supported Build Systems, Conclusion and References, Advanced Features, Top
@chapter Supported Build Systems
@findex Supported Build Systems
Check officially supports two build systems: Autotools and CMake.
Primarily it is recommended to use Autotools where possible, as CMake is
only officially supported for Windows. Information on using Check in
either build system follows.
@menu
* Autotools::
* CMake::
@end menu
@node Autotools, CMake, Supported Build Systems, Supported Build Systems
@section Autotools
It is recommended to use pkg-config where possible to locate and use
Check in an Autotools project. This can be accomplished by including
the following in the project's @file{configure.ac} file:
@verbatim
PKG_CHECK_MODULES([CHECK], [check >= MINIMUM-VERSION])
@end verbatim
where MINIMUM-VERSION is the lowest version which is sufficient for
the project. For example, to guarantee that at least version 0.9.6 is
available, use the following:
@verbatim
PKG_CHECK_MODULES([CHECK], [check >= 0.9.6])
@end verbatim
An example of a @file{configure.ac} script for a project is
included in the @file{doc/example} directory in Check's source.
This macro should provide everything necessary to integrate Check
into an Autotools project.
If one does not wish to use pkg-config Check also provides its own
macro, @code{AM_PATH_CHECK()}, which may be used. This macro is
deprecated, but is still included with Check for backwards compatibility.
The @code{AM_PATH_CHECK()} macro is defined in the file
@file{check.m4} which is installed by Check. It has some optional
parameters that you might find useful in your @file{configure.ac}:
@verbatim
AM_PATH_CHECK([MINIMUM-VERSION,
[ACTION-IF-FOUND[,ACTION-IF-NOT-FOUND]]])
@end verbatim
@code{AM_PATH_CHECK} does several things:
@enumerate
@item
It ensures check.h is available
@item
It ensures a compatible version of Check is installed
@item
It sets @env{CHECK_CFLAGS} and @env{CHECK_LIBS} for use by Automake.
@end enumerate
If you include @code{AM_PATH_CHECK()} in @file{configure.ac} and
subsequently see warnings when attempting to create
@command{configure}, it probably means one of the following things:
@enumerate
@item
You forgot to call @command{aclocal}. @command{autoreconf} will do
this for you.
@item
@command{aclocal} can't find @file{check.m4}. Here are some possible
solutions:
@enumerate a
@item
Call @command{aclocal} with @option{-I} set to the location of
@file{check.m4}. This means you have to call both @command{aclocal} and
@command{autoreconf}.
@item
Add the location of @file{check.m4} to the @samp{dirlist} used by
@command{aclocal} and then call @command{autoreconf}. This means you
need permission to modify the @samp{dirlist}.
@item
Set @code{ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS} in your top-level @file{Makefile.am} to
include @option{-I DIR} with @code{DIR} being the location of
@file{check.m4}. Then call @command{autoreconf}.
@end enumerate
@end enumerate
@node CMake, , Autotools, Supported Build Systems
@section CMake
Those unable to use Autotools in their project may use CMake instead.
Officially CMake is supported only for Windows.
Documentation for using CMake is forthcoming. In the meantime, look
at the example CMake project in Check's @file{doc/examples} directory.
@node Conclusion and References, Environment Variable Reference, Supported Build Systems, Top
@chapter Conclusion and References
The tutorial and description of advanced features has provided an
introduction to all of the functionality available in Check.
Hopefully, this is enough to get you started writing unit tests with
Check. All the rest is simply application of what has been learned so
far with repeated application of the ``test a little, code a little''
strategy.
For further reference, see Kent Beck, ``Test-Driven Development: By
Example'', 1st ed., Addison-Wesley, 2003. ISBN 0-321-14653-0.
If you know of other authoritative references to unit testing and
test-driven development, please send us a patch to this manual.
@node Environment Variable Reference, Copying This Manual, Conclusion and References, Top
@appendix Environment Variable Reference
This is a reference to environment variables that Check recognized and their use.
CK_RUN_CASE: Name of a test case, runs only that test. See section @ref{Selective Running of Tests}.
CK_RUN_SUITE: Name of a test suite, runs only that suite. See section @ref{Selective Running of Tests}.
CK_INCLUDE_TAGS: String of space separated tags, runs only test cases associated with at least one of the tags, See section @ref{Selecting Tests Based on Arbitrary Tags}.
CK_EXCLUDE_TAGS: String of space separated tags, runs only test cases not associated with any of the tags, See section @ref{Selecting Tests Based on Arbitrary Tags}.
CK_VERBOSITY: How much output to emit, accepts: ``silent'', ``minimal'', ``normal'', ``subunit'', or ``verbose''. See section @ref{SRunner Output}.
CK_FORK: Set to ``no'' to disable using fork() to run unit tests in their own process. This is useful for debugging segmentation faults. See section @ref{No Fork Mode}.
CK_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT: Override Check's default unit test timeout, a floating value in seconds. ``0'' means no timeout. See section @ref{Test Timeouts}.
CK_TIMEOUT_MULTIPLIER: A multiplier used against the default unit test timeout. An integer, defaults to ``1''. See section @ref{Test Timeouts}.
CK_LOG_FILE_NAME: Filename to write logs to. See section @ref{Test Logging}.
CK_XML_LOG_FILE_NAME: Filename to write XML log to. See section @ref{XML Logging}.
CK_TAP_LOG_FILE_NAME: Filename to write TAP (Test Anything Protocol) output to. See section @ref{TAP Logging}.
CK_MAX_MSG_SIZE: Maximal assertion message size.
@node Copying This Manual, Index, Environment Variable Reference, Top
@appendix Copying This Manual
@menu
* GNU Free Documentation License:: License for copying this manual.
@end menu
@include fdl.texi
@node Index, , Copying This Manual, Top
@unnumbered Index
@printindex cp
@bye