Re: [PATCH v2 01/18] t7107, t7526: directly test parse_pathspec_file()

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

"Alexandr Miloslavskiy via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref]
writes:
...

quoted

3) Tests are indirect

That cuts both ways.  For a developer who is too narrowly focused
(because s/he spent enough time staring at the code), testing the
underlying machinery in a more direct way does feel attractive, but
at the same time, what matters to the end users is how well the
feature, when integrated into the commands they use (not the test
scaffolding like the "test-parse-pathspec-file" command), works.

So "indirect" is not necessarily a bad thing.

Just to avoid misunderstanding, I am not opposed to adding tests and
test helpers that allows direct access to the guts of the machinery
to check the behaviour of the lower level codepath.  I am merely
saying that such tests would not make it unnecessary to have
end-to-end tests that validates end-user visible effects.

Thanks.