-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 450
test: Added regression test for BitWriter / BitReader bool size inconsistency #561
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
writer.WriteObjectPacked(true); | ||
writer.WriteObjectPacked(false); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you might add other flavors of types here such as int[]
, INetworkSerializable
, Vector3
etc to test a few other things too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, this PR is just for the regression of the bool bug though. But I will test all the packed ones.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what about bool[]
then? :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah, also Yamato fails because fix #541 went into release/0.1.0
and it's not on develop
branch yet. so the test fails, which is very good! (except 2021.1 on Win passed? oh no...)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And yes, I put int he PR description: "Expect this to fail until the fix for this has been backported to develop."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yea as for yamato. The tests failed on all machine. But pack and validate succeeded. Which is a good sign!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mattwalsh-unity was talking about merging release/0.1.0
back into develop
some time soon. maybe we should that first and merge this in right afterwards?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is good to go now!
(with an optional change suggestion)
Expect this to fail until the fix for this has been backported to develop.
Perhaps target release?