M
mchoube
Hi,
if this post is off topic here so please pardon me and point to the
correct group.
we are in a process of testing our SDK from 'Security' point. we have
indentified few test cases but i feel some are invalid scenarios. i
will share the scenarios here please comment with your opnion(s).
the API has following prototype:
/**
* The name property is normally a user defined string that is used as
a human
* readable replacement for the schedule ID. This can be considered
the "file
* name" of the schedule. This should be used for display only, as
actually
* storing the schedule by name would require the file name to be
unique, which
* the schedule doesn't guarantee. The schedule ID property should be
used to
* identify the schedule.
*
* @param newVal [in] - The new schedule name.
*
* @return sig_result
*
* <dl>
* <dt>SIG_S_OK</dt>
* <dd>Method Call was successful.</dd>
*
* <dt>SIG_E_POINTER</dt>
* <dd>The newVal parameter was a NULL pointer.</dd>
* </dl>
*
* @see get_Name
*/
sig_result put_Name (const wchar_t* newVal);
the scenarios (which i think invalid test cases):
1. passing 'char *' variable as parameter to put_Name () instead of
'wchar_t *'.
2. passing 'long *' variable as parameter to put_Name () instead of
'wchar_t *'.
are the above test cases valid? my argument is that the compiler does
give you a warning so you should be fixing it instead of passing 'char
*' or 'long *'. how can we check the datatype of the parameter passed
in the API?
any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Mehul
if this post is off topic here so please pardon me and point to the
correct group.
we are in a process of testing our SDK from 'Security' point. we have
indentified few test cases but i feel some are invalid scenarios. i
will share the scenarios here please comment with your opnion(s).
the API has following prototype:
/**
* The name property is normally a user defined string that is used as
a human
* readable replacement for the schedule ID. This can be considered
the "file
* name" of the schedule. This should be used for display only, as
actually
* storing the schedule by name would require the file name to be
unique, which
* the schedule doesn't guarantee. The schedule ID property should be
used to
* identify the schedule.
*
* @param newVal [in] - The new schedule name.
*
* @return sig_result
*
* <dl>
* <dt>SIG_S_OK</dt>
* <dd>Method Call was successful.</dd>
*
* <dt>SIG_E_POINTER</dt>
* <dd>The newVal parameter was a NULL pointer.</dd>
* </dl>
*
* @see get_Name
*/
sig_result put_Name (const wchar_t* newVal);
the scenarios (which i think invalid test cases):
1. passing 'char *' variable as parameter to put_Name () instead of
'wchar_t *'.
2. passing 'long *' variable as parameter to put_Name () instead of
'wchar_t *'.
are the above test cases valid? my argument is that the compiler does
give you a warning so you should be fixing it instead of passing 'char
*' or 'long *'. how can we check the datatype of the parameter passed
in the API?
any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Mehul