Unit tests and memory safety #765
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
At long last, I have implemented few rudimentary unit tests for SensESP. Not great, but at least it will be easier to add new ones in the future.
Also at long last, I have taken some steps to improve memory safety on SensESP. The codebase has been quite nonchalant about creating objects on the heap and not properly tracking them. This hasn't been an issue as long as the enclosing objects haven't been destroyed, but it's not a good practice, and with unit testing, it should be expected that the whole SensESP app will be torn down. I have now wrapped many internal heap objects in
shared_ptrorunique_ptrand also added some destructors for select classes.