aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/tests
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'tests')
-rw-r--r--tests/test_mainwindow.cpp195
1 files changed, 191 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/tests/test_mainwindow.cpp b/tests/test_mainwindow.cpp
index 4d70a29..0ad45ee 100644
--- a/tests/test_mainwindow.cpp
+++ b/tests/test_mainwindow.cpp
@@ -331,6 +331,7 @@ private slots:
void everyActionCarriesAnIcon();
void everyActionIsReachableFromAMenu();
+ void noMenuHasTwoEntriesSharingAMnemonic();
void theToolbarDoesNotOverrideTheDesktopButtonStyle();
void theImportantActionIsLabelledImportant();
void theImportantActionStillWritesTheFlaggedTag();
@@ -6444,6 +6445,185 @@ void TestMainWindow::everyActionIsReachableFromAMenu()
.arg(unreachable.join(QStringLiteral(", ")))));
}
+void TestMainWindow::noMenuHasTwoEntriesSharingAMnemonic()
+{
+ // The sibling of everyActionIsReachableFromAMenu(), and it exists because
+ // the rule it enforces had lived only in prose and in one other test's
+ // COMMENT, and was duly broken the first time a batch of entries was added
+ // to a menu (item 123: `&Reply` against the pre-existing `&Restore from
+ // trash`, both Alt+R).
+ //
+ // Qt does not error on a duplicate mnemonic. It CYCLES between the
+ // colliding entries instead of activating either, so the key silently
+ // stops working and merely moves a highlight. That is worse than it
+ // sounds in the Message menu, where `restore` is deliberately greyed
+ // outside the trash view: the ordinary case was pressing Alt+R and landing
+ // on a disabled entry.
+ //
+ // Item 57 already decided this is a property rather than a taste. It
+ // rejected the label "Starred" for `flag` precisely because it would have
+ // collided with `Mark &spam`, and theImportantActionIsLabelledImportant()
+ // pins the surviving label with that reasoning in its comment. A decision
+ // recorded only in prose is one nobody re-derives.
+ //
+ // Scoped PER MENU, which is what the collision actually is: a mnemonic is
+ // resolved among the entries of the menu that is open, so the same letter
+ // in File and in View is not a conflict.
+ const Config config;
+ MainWindow window(config);
+
+ auto *bar = window.menuBar();
+ QVERIFY(bar);
+
+ // The menu bar's own top-level titles are one such scope too, so the walk
+ // starts by treating the bar as a menu and then descends.
+ QList<QPair<QString, QList<QAction *>>> scopes;
+ scopes.append({ QStringLiteral("the menu bar"), bar->actions() });
+
+ QList<QMenu *> pending;
+ const auto topLevel = bar->actions();
+ for (QAction *action : topLevel) {
+ if (action->menu())
+ pending.append(action->menu());
+ }
+ QVERIFY2(!pending.isEmpty(), "the menu bar holds no menus");
+
+ while (!pending.isEmpty()) {
+ QMenu *menu = pending.takeFirst();
+ const auto entries = menu->actions();
+ scopes.append({ menu->title(), entries });
+ for (QAction *entry : entries) {
+ if (QMenu *sub = entry->menu())
+ pending.append(sub);
+ }
+ }
+
+ // The four collisions that PREDATE this test, measured by running it
+ // against the tree before item 123 touched any label. They are listed
+ // rather than fixed, and rather than being hidden by narrowing the test,
+ // because renaming a shipped menu entry is the user's call and not a
+ // test's: three of them are in menus a user has had in their fingers
+ // since 0.1.0.
+ //
+ // Listed as exact pairs, not as "ignore Alt+R", so this is a freeze and
+ // not an amnesty: a NEW entry colliding on any of these same keys still
+ // fails, because its pair is not on this list. Fixing one is then a
+ // one-line deletion here, which is the point of writing them out.
+ // Written as the FULL GROUP of labels sharing one key in one menu, not as
+ // a pair. A pair is keyed on which entry the walk happened to see first,
+ // so adding a colliding entry ABOVE a frozen one silently re-pairs it and
+ // the new defect gets reported as "a frozen collision no longer happens",
+ // which names the wrong thing entirely. Measured: reinstating `&Reply`
+ // did exactly that before this was changed. A group is order-independent,
+ // so a new entry grows the group and fails as a new collision.
+ static const QStringList knownPreExistingCollisions = {
+ QStringLiteral("&Message: Alt+R shared by \"&Restore from trash\", \"Mark all &read\", \"Tagging &rules...\""),
+ QStringLiteral("&Message: Alt+S shared by \"Mark &spam\", \"Find &stranded deleted mail\""),
+ QStringLiteral("&View: Alt+O shared by \"&Open thread\", \"Zoom &out\""),
+ };
+
+ QStringList collisions;
+ int compared = 0;
+
+ for (const auto &scope : scopes) {
+ // Keyed on the mnemonic Qt itself derives, not on a hand-parsed '&'.
+ // The question is which key Qt will dispatch, and only Qt answers it:
+ // "&&" is a literal ampersand and carries no mnemonic at all.
+ //
+ // A QMap rather than a QHash so the groups come out in a stable key
+ // order, which is what lets the frozen list above be written once and
+ // stay matching.
+ QMap<QString, QStringList> byMnemonic;
+ for (QAction *entry : scope.second) {
+ if (entry->isSeparator())
+ continue;
+ const QKeySequence mnemonic = QKeySequence::mnemonic(entry->text());
+ if (mnemonic.isEmpty())
+ continue;
+ ++compared;
+ byMnemonic[mnemonic.toString(QKeySequence::NativeText)]
+ .append(QStringLiteral("\"%1\"").arg(entry->text()));
+ }
+
+ for (auto it = byMnemonic.cbegin(); it != byMnemonic.cend(); ++it) {
+ if (it.value().size() < 2)
+ continue;
+ // Names the menu, the key and EVERY label in the group, so a
+ // future failure says what to rename without anyone going looking.
+ collisions.append(QStringLiteral("%1: %2 shared by %3")
+ .arg(scope.first, it.key(),
+ it.value().join(QStringLiteral(", "))));
+ }
+ }
+
+ // The guard, and it is not ceremonial: every assertion below is a loop
+ // that reports success when it runs zero times. A walk that found no
+ // mnemonics at all would pass this test against any label whatsoever.
+ QVERIFY2(compared > 20,
+ qPrintable(QStringLiteral("only %1 menu entries carried a "
+ "mnemonic, so this probe measured "
+ "almost nothing")
+ .arg(compared)));
+
+ // Matched on the menu and key only, with the labels compared separately
+ // below. Comparing whole strings made a GROWING group read as a frozen one
+ // disappearing: adding `&Reply` took Alt+R from three labels to four, the
+ // frozen three-label string stopped matching, and the failure said "this
+ // collision no longer happens" about the very key that had just got worse.
+ // Measured twice, once per attempt, which is why the two questions are
+ // asked separately.
+ const auto scopeAndKey = [](const QString &collision) {
+ return collision.left(collision.indexOf(QStringLiteral(" shared by ")));
+ };
+
+ QHash<QString, QString> frozen;
+ for (const QString &known : knownPreExistingCollisions)
+ frozen.insert(scopeAndKey(known), known);
+
+ QStringList unexpected;
+ QSet<QString> stillPresent;
+ for (const QString &collision : collisions) {
+ const QString key = scopeAndKey(collision);
+ const auto known = frozen.constFind(key);
+ if (known == frozen.constEnd()) {
+ // A collision on a key nothing froze: entirely new.
+ unexpected.append(collision);
+ continue;
+ }
+ stillPresent.insert(key);
+ if (*known != collision) {
+ // The key was already colliding, but the CAST has changed, which
+ // for a frozen entry means an entry joined it. Reported as the
+ // new collision it is, naming both what was frozen and what is
+ // there now.
+ unexpected.append(
+ QStringLiteral("%1 (frozen as [%2], now [%3])")
+ .arg(key, *known, collision));
+ }
+ }
+
+ // A frozen entry that has since been FIXED must not stay on the list
+ // silently, or the list becomes a place stale claims accumulate.
+ QStringList stale;
+ for (const QString &known : knownPreExistingCollisions) {
+ if (!stillPresent.contains(scopeAndKey(known)))
+ stale.append(known);
+ }
+ QVERIFY2(stale.isEmpty(),
+ qPrintable(QStringLiteral("%1 frozen collision(s) no longer "
+ "happen, so delete them from "
+ "knownPreExistingCollisions: %2")
+ .arg(stale.size())
+ .arg(stale.join(QStringLiteral("; ")))));
+
+ QVERIFY2(unexpected.isEmpty(),
+ qPrintable(QStringLiteral("%1 menu mnemonic collision(s), where "
+ "Qt cycles the highlight instead of "
+ "activating: %2")
+ .arg(unexpected.size())
+ .arg(unexpected.join(QStringLiteral("; ")))));
+}
+
void TestMainWindow::everyActionCarriesAnIcon()
{
// Item 56. The complaint was inconsistency, not absence: eight actions had
@@ -6967,15 +7147,22 @@ void TestMainWindow::noTwoActionsShareAnIcon()
// the words saying which. Giving them five invented shapes would be less
// clear than the pairing.
//
+ // reply_no_quote joined them in item 123 for exactly the same reason: it
+ // shares reply's icon, it is a menu entry that always carries its text,
+ // and it is not on the toolbar. The list is therefore no longer only the
+ // thread tier, which is why it is named for the PROPERTY that earns the
+ // exemption rather than for the tier that first needed it.
+ //
// Named as an exception list rather than by asking the toolbar what it
// holds, so that PUTTING one of these on the toolbar fails this test
// rather than silently passing it.
- static const QStringList menuOnlyThreadActions = {
+ static const QStringList menuOnlySharedIconActions = {
QStringLiteral("archive_thread"),
QStringLiteral("delete_thread"),
QStringLiteral("spam_thread"),
QStringLiteral("toggle_unread_thread"),
QStringLiteral("flag_thread"),
+ QStringLiteral("reply_no_quote"),
};
const Config config;
@@ -6986,7 +7173,7 @@ void TestMainWindow::noTwoActionsShareAnIcon()
// may sit on the toolbar.
auto *toolBar = window.findChild<QToolBar *>();
QVERIFY(toolBar);
- for (const QString &name : menuOnlyThreadActions) {
+ for (const QString &name : menuOnlySharedIconActions) {
auto *action = window.findChild<QAction *>(name);
QVERIFY2(action, qPrintable(QStringLiteral("no action named %1").arg(name)));
QVERIFY2(!toolBar->actions().contains(action),
@@ -7006,7 +7193,7 @@ void TestMainWindow::noTwoActionsShareAnIcon()
QVERIFY2(action, qPrintable(QStringLiteral("no action named %1").arg(name)));
if (!action->icon().isNull())
++withIcons;
- if (menuOnlyThreadActions.contains(name))
+ if (menuOnlySharedIconActions.contains(name))
continue;
if (action->icon().isNull())
continue;
@@ -7033,7 +7220,7 @@ void TestMainWindow::noTwoActionsShareAnIcon()
// And the exception list did not swallow the comparison itself.
QCOMPARE(compared, KeyMap::knownActions().size()
- - menuOnlyThreadActions.size());
+ - menuOnlySharedIconActions.size());
QVERIFY2(collisions.isEmpty(),
qPrintable(QStringLiteral("actions sharing one icon: %1")