456-fix-error-codes

[Ankaa19]

add errors to facility functions #456

Error handling code was created for the following functions:

• stumpless_get_facility_string
• stumpless_get_facility_enum
• stumpless_get_facility_enum_from_buffer

[goatshriek]

It's unclear to me why you've chosen to implement a file-specific error code instead of using the error code functionality already present in the library.

Please rework this change to use the library's existing error code functions (defined in src/error.c and used extensively throughout the project).

[Ankaa19]

hello, I change my pull request according to your comment. Is it ok?

[goatshriek]

Please remove the .idea folder from the commits, and add tests as described in the original issue.

[Ankaa19]

Hello,
sorry for delay. I was sick. I added tests according to the requirements in the issue to the pull request.
Please check it and if it's ok could you merge it?

[goatshriek]

You'll need to get the tests passing, of course. From the one that I looked at you'll probably need to do a few rounds of tweaks and rebuilds.

[Ankaa19]

Sorry, this is my first time working with tests. I edit them and all tests passed. Is it ok this way?

[Ankaa19]

I'm sorry for inconvenience, in the previous edit here on github, not all the edits I have made have been changed. Can you please run the control again? I edited it now.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 90.07%. Comparing base (b638f77) to head (dd7de98).
Report is 2 commits behind head on latest.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           latest     #475      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.40%   90.07%   -0.34%     
==========================================
  Files          47       47              
  Lines        4388     4421      +33     
  Branches      588      595       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits         3967     3982      +15     
- Misses        286      295       +9     
- Partials      135      144       +9     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[goatshriek]

Please see the first round of requested changes below, in addition to correcting the header check in the static analysis run that failed.

[Ankaa19]

Requested changes have been done.

[Ankaa19]

I dont understant it. I set expect true but in errors is that it expect false. How it is possible?
I see that you assigned pull request on you so I shouldn't continue with it?

[goatshriek]

I see that you assigned pull request on you so I shouldn't continue with it?

No, it's assigned so that you know who is reviewing it and responsible for giving you feedback when needed.

I haven't run the tests myself - are they passing when you run them locally? Have you tried adding some print statements or running the test using a debugger (e.g. gdb ./function-test-facility from the build directory) with breakpoints to understand the execution flow?