Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2020-08-06

Re: [PATCH 3/4] t7401: ensure uniformity in the '--for-status' test

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2020-08-06 17:19:38

Shourya Shukla [off-list ref] writes:
On 05/08 02:30, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
Shourya Shukla [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
The '--for-status' test got its expected output from stdin. This is
inconsistent with the other tests in the test script which get their
expected output from a file named 'expected'.

So, change the syntax of the '--for-status' test for uniformity.
There are a handful examples in t5401 and another one in t3700 that
give the "golden master" from the standard input.  When the expected
output is used only once, I do not think it is particularlly bad to
have it this way.  So,... meh?
I realised what you were trying to say after checking out t5400 and
t3700. I understand that this change may not be immediately needed but I
think it does make reading the diff a bit easier since having a '-' as a
file name does get a bit confusing when reading the output. 
If so, perhaps justifying the change based on that, not on
"consistency", would be a good idea.

        Side note: But would that mean you'd find it "confusing" to
        read output from 3700 and 5400?  Would "test writers should
        get used to it" be a workable alternative solution?

Since "test_cmp expect actual" and "test_cmp - actual <<HERE" are
_both_ valid forms that are useful for different situations, I do
not see a compelling reason to insist on one form is consistently
used and ban the use of the other.

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