Re: [PATCH] test-lib-functions: simplify `test_file_not_empty` failure message

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Dirk Gouders [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Eric Sunshine [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 5:11 PM Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Eric Sunshine [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

A more accurate message might be "'foo' is empty but
should not be (or doesn't exist)", but that's unnecessarily long-winded
and adds little information that the test author couldn't discover by
noticing the file's absence.

The "adds little information" version may be

                echo "'$1' is either missing or empty, but should not be"
...

I find "'$1' is either missing or empty, but should not be" suggestion
clear and easily understood. I'll reroll with that.

This is a view from a position with more distance:

I find that not so easily understood -- the "but should not
be" part is rather unexpected and I feel, it doesn't provide necessary
information, e.g.:

test_path_is_executable () {
...
		echo "$1 is not executable"
...

also doesn't state what is wanted and I doubt that message doesn't
clearly describe the problem.

I cannot tell if you really meant the double negative involving
"doubt", but assuming you did, you are saying that

I'm sorry about that double negative which was probably wrong wording of
a non-native speaker.

    With "X is not Y", it is clear enough that we expect X to be Y
    (if it were not clear to somebody who read "X is not Y" that we
    want X to be Y, then "X is not Y, but it should be" may needed,
    but "X is not Y" is clear enough).

So you think "$1 is either missing or empty" is better without "but
should not be" added to the end?  Am I reading you correctly?

I think this takes us back pretty much to square one ;-) but that is
also fine.

But the above argument depends on an untold assumption.  The message
"X is not Y" must be clearly understood as a complaint, not a mere
statement of a fact.  I am not sure if that is the case.

Instead of "X is not Y, but it should be", the way to clarify these
messages may be to say "error: X is not Y", perhaps?

That is exactly what came to my mind when I was later re-thinking
what I had written.

quoted

While I looked at it: there is another `test -s` in test_grep () that
perhaps could be fixed the same way:

	if test -s "$last_arg"
	then
		cat >&4 "$last_arg"
	else
		echo >&4 "<File '$last_arg' is empty>"
	fi

If you are worried about "test -s" failing because "$last_arg" does
not exist, then you are worried too much.  We upfront guard the
test_grep() helper with "test -f" of the same file and diagnoses the
lack of the file as a bug in the test.  And we do not assume gremlins
removing random files while we are running tests.

Yes, thank you for clarification and sorry for the noise.

Dirk