Thread (2 messages) 2 messages, 2 authors, 2020-07-31

Re: [PATCH v1] t6300: fix issues related to %(contents:size)

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2020-07-31 20:30:07

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 01:04:10PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
Definitely fixes the issue, though I wonder:
quoted
-		echo $expect >expected
-		test_expect_${4:-sucess} $PREREQ "basic atom: $1 contents:size" '
+		echo $expect >expect
+		test_expect_${4:-success} $PREREQ "basic atom: $1 contents:size" '
 			git for-each-ref --format="%(contents:size)" "$ref" >actual &&
 			test_cmp expect actual
 		'
Should we instead switch the test_cmp to look at "expected" to be
consistent with the rest of the tests in this file?
If I recall correctly, "expect vs actual" were more common when I
counted across all the tests last time.  Matching local convention
is fine, though.
Yes, I agree that "expect" is where we should be heading overall. I
think matching local convention is best here to avoid introducing new
mistakes like this one, but I wouldn't be opposed to somebody switching
out s/expected/expect/ in the whole file.

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help