Re: strange cppunit test bug - result that is compared changes when modifying the expected value

Hi Miklos, *,

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:04:44AM +0200, Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 10/10/2013 02:06 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> > > make CppunitTest_sw_ooxmlexport
> > > [...]
> > > I change that line from 127 to 128:
> > >     CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUAL( sal_Int32( 128 ), getProperty< sal_Int32 >(
> > > xFrame, "BottomBorderDistance" ) );
> > >
> > > and run the test again, and now I get:
> > > fdo66929.docx,ooxmlexport.cxx:1067:Assertion
> > > Test name: Test::run
> > > equality assertion failed
> > > - Expected: 128
> > > - Actual  : 127
> > >
> > > So mysteriously now the actual value is the correct/the initially expected one?!
>
> Note that these tests are run twice:
> http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlexport/ooxmlexport.cxx#256
>
> Isn't it possible that in the first case the "import" fails, and in the
> second case the "import-export-import" fails? (Or the other way around.)

Ah, interesting.

With the original value (127) and an puts("FindMeInTheOutput"); before
the actual check I get this:
[...]
fdo66929.docx,ooxmlexport.cxx:1065:Assertion
Test name: Test::run
equality assertion failed
- Expected: 127
- Actual  : 254

Failures !!!
Run: 1   Failure total: 1   Failures: 1   Errors: 0
FindMeInTheOutput
FindMeInTheOutput

Error: a unit test failed, please do one of:
#################
i.e. indeed called twice.
now when I change it to 128 I get:
[...]
fdo66929.docx,ooxmlexport.cxx:1065:Assertion
Test name: Test::run
equality assertion failed
- Expected: 128
- Actual  : 127

Failures !!!
Run: 1   Failure total: 1   Failures: 1   Errors: 0
FindMeInTheOutput

Error: a unit test failed, please do one of:
##################

So failed earlier.

So on first check, the property returns the proper value, the second
time it fails.

> Though, still strange that this happens only on CentOS5, and not on more
> recent systems.

And even there only on 32bit.

ciao
Christian