test NTTable column order in QGroup

[ericonr]

No description provided.

[ericonr]

# testTableOrder
ok 11 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
#   "A"
ok 12 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
#   "B"
not ok 13 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
# - "A"
# + "B"
not ok 14 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
# - "B"
# + "A"
ok 15 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
#   "event"
ok 16 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
#   "timestamp"
not ok 17 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
# - "event"
# + "timestamp"
not ok 18 - value.nameOf(fld) == order[i++]
# - "timestamp"
# + "event"

[mdavidsaver]

The +putorder side-effect is tested in testqgroup.cpp by setting alternating PO1 and PO2.

pvxs/test/testqgroup.cpp

Lines 751 to 752 in ff1d651

	testdbReadDatabase("table.db", nullptr, "N=tbl:,LBL1=Column A,LBL2=Column B,PO1=0,PO2=1");
	testdbReadDatabase("table.db", nullptr, "N=tbl2:,LBL1=Column B,LBL2=Column A,PO1=1,PO2=0");

resulting in

pvxs/test/testqgroup.cpp

Lines 137 to 138 in ff1d651

	"value.A double[] = {3}[1, 2, 3]\n"
	"value.B double[] = {3}[4, 5, 6]\n");

vs.

pvxs/test/testqgroup.cpp

Lines 155 to 156 in ff1d651

	"value.B double[] = {0}[]\n"
	"value.A double[] = {0}[]\n");