1 files changed, 64 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/tests/internal/test_anonymous_globals.odin b/tests/internal/test_anonymous_globals.odin
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..dd59ee376
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/internal/test_anonymous_globals.odin
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+package test_internal
+
+import "core:testing"
+
+
+
+@(test)
+test_address_of_anonymous_global :: proc(t: ^testing.T) {
+    // This loop exists so that we do more computation with stack memory
+    // This increases the likelihood of catching a bug where anonymous globals are incorrectly allocated on the stack
+    // instead of the data segment
+    for _ in 0..<10 {
+        testing.expect(t, global_variable.inner.field == 0xDEADBEEF)
+    }
+}
+
+global_variable := Outer_Struct{
+    inner = &Inner_Struct{
+        field = 0xDEADBEEF,
+    },
+}
+Outer_Struct :: struct{
+    inner: ^Inner_Struct,
+
+    // Must have a second field to prevent the compiler from simplifying the `Outer_Struct` type to `^Inner_Struct`
+    // ...I think? In any case, don't remove this field
+    _: int,
+}
+Inner_Struct :: struct{
+    field: int,
+}
+
+
+
+// Regression test for commit f1e3977cf94dfc0457f05d499cc280d8e1329086 where a larger anonymous global is needed to trigger
+// the bug
+@(test)
+test_address_of_large_anonymous_global :: proc(t: ^testing.T) {
+    // This loop exists so that we do more computation with stack memory
+    // This increases the likelihood of catching a bug where anonymous globals are incorrectly allocated on the stack
+    // instead of the data segment
+    for _ in 0..<10 {
+        for i in 0..<8 {
+            testing.expect(t, global_variable_64.inner.field[i] == i)
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+#assert(size_of(Inner_Struct_64) == 64)
+global_variable_64 := Outer_Struct_64{
+    inner = &Inner_Struct_64{
+        field = [8]int{0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7},
+    },
+}
+Outer_Struct_64 :: struct{
+    inner: ^Inner_Struct_64,
+
+    // Must have a second field to prevent the compiler from simplifying the `Outer_Struct` type to `^Inner_Struct`
+    // ...I think? In any case, don't remove this field
+    _: int,
+}
+Inner_Struct_64 :: struct{
+    field: [8]int,
+}