LUMIERA.clone/tests/core/steam/asset/identity-of-assets-test.cpp

108 lines
3.2 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

/*
IdentityOfAssets(Test) - Asset object identity and versioning
2010-12-17 23:28:49 +01:00
Copyright: clarify and simplify the file headers * Lumiera source code always was copyrighted by individual contributors * there is no entity "Lumiera.org" which holds any copyrights * Lumiera source code is provided under the GPL Version 2+ == Explanations == Lumiera as a whole is distributed under Copyleft, GNU General Public License Version 2 or above. For this to become legally effective, the ''File COPYING in the root directory is sufficient.'' The licensing header in each file is not strictly necessary, yet considered good practice; attaching a licence notice increases the likeliness that this information is retained in case someone extracts individual code files. However, it is not by the presence of some text, that legally binding licensing terms become effective; rather the fact matters that a given piece of code was provably copyrighted and published under a license. Even reformatting the code, renaming some variables or deleting parts of the code will not alter this legal situation, but rather creates a derivative work, which is likewise covered by the GPL! The most relevant information in the file header is the notice regarding the time of the first individual copyright claim. By virtue of this initial copyright, the first author is entitled to choose the terms of licensing. All further modifications are permitted and covered by the License. The specific wording or format of the copyright header is not legally relevant, as long as the intention to publish under the GPL remains clear. The extended wording was based on a recommendation by the FSF. It can be shortened, because the full terms of the license are provided alongside the distribution, in the file COPYING.
2024-11-17 23:42:55 +01:00
Copyright (C)
2008, Hermann Vosseler <Ichthyostega@web.de>
2010-12-17 23:28:49 +01:00
Copyright: clarify and simplify the file headers * Lumiera source code always was copyrighted by individual contributors * there is no entity "Lumiera.org" which holds any copyrights * Lumiera source code is provided under the GPL Version 2+ == Explanations == Lumiera as a whole is distributed under Copyleft, GNU General Public License Version 2 or above. For this to become legally effective, the ''File COPYING in the root directory is sufficient.'' The licensing header in each file is not strictly necessary, yet considered good practice; attaching a licence notice increases the likeliness that this information is retained in case someone extracts individual code files. However, it is not by the presence of some text, that legally binding licensing terms become effective; rather the fact matters that a given piece of code was provably copyrighted and published under a license. Even reformatting the code, renaming some variables or deleting parts of the code will not alter this legal situation, but rather creates a derivative work, which is likewise covered by the GPL! The most relevant information in the file header is the notice regarding the time of the first individual copyright claim. By virtue of this initial copyright, the first author is entitled to choose the terms of licensing. All further modifications are permitted and covered by the License. The specific wording or format of the copyright header is not legally relevant, as long as the intention to publish under the GPL remains clear. The extended wording was based on a recommendation by the FSF. It can be shortened, because the full terms of the license are provided alongside the distribution, in the file COPYING.
2024-11-17 23:42:55 +01:00
  **Lumiera** is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
  under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
  Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
  option) any later version. See the file COPYING for further details.
2010-12-17 23:28:49 +01:00
Copyright: clarify and simplify the file headers * Lumiera source code always was copyrighted by individual contributors * there is no entity "Lumiera.org" which holds any copyrights * Lumiera source code is provided under the GPL Version 2+ == Explanations == Lumiera as a whole is distributed under Copyleft, GNU General Public License Version 2 or above. For this to become legally effective, the ''File COPYING in the root directory is sufficient.'' The licensing header in each file is not strictly necessary, yet considered good practice; attaching a licence notice increases the likeliness that this information is retained in case someone extracts individual code files. However, it is not by the presence of some text, that legally binding licensing terms become effective; rather the fact matters that a given piece of code was provably copyrighted and published under a license. Even reformatting the code, renaming some variables or deleting parts of the code will not alter this legal situation, but rather creates a derivative work, which is likewise covered by the GPL! The most relevant information in the file header is the notice regarding the time of the first individual copyright claim. By virtue of this initial copyright, the first author is entitled to choose the terms of licensing. All further modifications are permitted and covered by the License. The specific wording or format of the copyright header is not legally relevant, as long as the intention to publish under the GPL remains clear. The extended wording was based on a recommendation by the FSF. It can be shortened, because the full terms of the license are provided alongside the distribution, in the file COPYING.
2024-11-17 23:42:55 +01:00
* *****************************************************************/
/** @file identity-of-assets-test.cpp
** unit test \ref IdentityOfAssets_test
*/
#include "include/logging.h"
#include "lib/test/run.hpp"
#include "lib/util.hpp"
#include "steam/assetmanager.hpp"
#include "steam/asset/media.hpp"
#include "steam/asset/proc.hpp"
#include "steam/asset/asset-diagnostics.hpp"
#include "vault/media-access-mock.hpp"
#include "lib/depend-inject.hpp"
using util::isnil;
using std::string;
namespace steam {
namespace asset{
namespace test {
using MediaAccessMock = lib::DependInject<vault::MediaAccessFacade>
::Local<vault::test::MediaAccessMock>;
/*******************************************************************//**
* @test creating several Assets and checking object identity,
* detection of duplicates and version handling.
* @see proc_interface::AssetManager#reg
*/
class IdentityOfAssets_test : public Test
{
virtual void run(Arg arg)
{
createDuplicate();
if (!isnil (arg))
dumpAssetManager();
TRACE (asset_mem, "leaving IdentityOfAssets_test::run()");
}
typedef shared_ptr<asset::Media> PM;
/** @test produce an ID clash.
* documents the current behaviour of the code as of 9/07
* @todo this test is expected to break when the detection
* of duplicate registrations is implemented.
*/
void createDuplicate()
{
MediaAccessMock useMockMedia;
PM mm1 = asset::Media::create ("test-1.mov", VIDEO);
Asset::Ident idi (mm1->ident); // duplicate Ident record
PM mm1X = asset::Media::create (idi); // note: we actually don't call any ctor
CHECK (mm1 == mm1X); // instead, we got mm1 back.
PM mm2 = asset::Media::create (idi,"test-2.mov");
CHECK (mm1->getID() == mm2->getID()); // different object, same hash
AssetManager& aMang = AssetManager::instance();
CHECK (aMang.getAsset (mm1->getID()) == mm2); // record of mm1 was replaced by mm2
CHECK (aMang.getAsset (mm2->getID()) == mm2);
CHECK (aMang.known (mm1->getID()));
CHECK (aMang.known (mm2->getID()));
CHECK (mm1->ident.name == "test-1");
CHECK (mm2->ident.name == "test-1");
CHECK (mm1->getFilename() == "test-1.mov");
CHECK (mm2->getFilename() == "test-2.mov");
TRACE (asset_mem, "leaving test method scope");
}
};
/** Register this test class... */
LAUNCHER (IdentityOfAssets_test, "unit asset");
}}} // namespace steam::asset::test