You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
An interesting function. Thanks for sharing. I did a small test and found out that whitespaces are not ignored. Is there any reason to do so?
Here's my test using utPLSQL:
CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE test_get_codehash4cmp IS
--%suite--%rollback(manual)--%beforeall
PROCEDURE setup;
--%afterall
PROCEDURE teardown;
--%test
PROCEDURE test_ignore_nl;
--%test
PROCEDURE test_ignore_space;
END test_get_codehash4cmp;
/
CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE BODY test_get_codehash4cmp IS
PROCEDURE setup IS
BEGIN-- requires create procedure privilege granted directly to the user
EXECUTE IMMEDIATE 'CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE p1 IS BEGIN NULL; END;';
EXECUTE IMMEDIATE 'CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE p2 IS BEGIN NULL; END;';
EXECUTE IMMEDIATE 'CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE p3 IS BEGIN NULL;END;';
END;
PROCEDURE teardown IS
BEGIN
EXECUTE IMMEDIATE 'DROP PROCEDURE p1';
EXECUTE IMMEDIATE 'DROP PROCEDURE p2';
EXECUTE IMMEDIATE 'DROP PROCEDURE p3';
END;
PROCEDURE test_ignore_nl IS
BEGINut.expect(get_codehash4cmp('P1')).to_equal(get_codehash4cmp('P2'));
END test_ignore_nl;
PROCEDURE test_ignore_space IS
BEGINut.expect(get_codehash4cmp('P1')).to_equal(get_codehash4cmp('P3'));
END test_ignore_space;
END test_get_codehash4cmp;
/
The test output is:
test_get_codehash4cmp
test_ignore_nl [.014 sec] (FAILED - 1)
test_ignore_space [.009 sec] (FAILED - 2)
Failures:
1) test_ignore_nl
Actual: 'D7582B235E3039360815D9FCFD1ABB9EFCF5885C5F87013B1DDA15F13B3AFF31B8E13B92519AAFDFCABC893B82019732' (varchar2) was expected to equal: '425D771E01089C67C4DAF1D9D36CA56DA4DB701CE66560A02B2BB9CC20A847FCCF1AB239DEC0EDC2EA6D0541D92C2A7D' (varchar2)
at "SCOTT.TEST_GET_CODEHASH4CMP.TEST_IGNORE_NL", line 23 ut.expect(get_codehash4cmp('P1')).to_equal(get_codehash4cmp('P2'));
2) test_ignore_space
Actual: 'D7582B235E3039360815D9FCFD1ABB9EFCF5885C5F87013B1DDA15F13B3AFF31B8E13B92519AAFDFCABC893B82019732' (varchar2) was expected to equal: 'FE6A4ED2176F8D191B9DD8BF8281B2DFF20D1C73238F9169755236655E2168FEFDBF81243B28285DF0EA12DD9B035408' (varchar2)
at "SCOTT.TEST_GET_CODEHASH4CMP.TEST_IGNORE_SPACE", line 28 ut.expect(get_codehash4cmp('P1')).to_equal(get_codehash4cmp('P3'));
Finished in .258925 seconds
2 tests, 2 failed, 0 errored, 0 disabled, 0 warning(s)
To get a better result the hash should be based on the relevant tokens produced by a lexer. Comments should probably also be excluded (of course hints and comments should different lexer tokens).
Thanks
Philipp
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi Friedhold,
An interesting function. Thanks for sharing. I did a small test and found out that whitespaces are not ignored. Is there any reason to do so?
Here's my test using utPLSQL:
The test output is:
To get a better result the hash should be based on the relevant tokens produced by a lexer. Comments should probably also be excluded (of course hints and comments should different lexer tokens).
Thanks
Philipp
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: