All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Jeff King" <peff@peff.net>, "Elijah Newren" <newren@gmail.com>,
	"Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
	"Fabian Stelzer" <fs@gigacodes.de>,
	"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
	"Eric Sunshine" <sunshine@sunshineco.com>,
	"Eric Sunshine" <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Subject: [PATCH 10/18] chainlint.pl: don't flag broken &&-chain if `$?` handled explicitly
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:29:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7df396ddea4cdaf9d014bb90a38da010676c1ce8.1661992197.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.1322.git.git.1661992197.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>

There are cases in which tests capture and check a command's exit code
explicitly without employing test_expect_code(). They do so by
intentionally breaking the &&-chain since it would be impossible to
capture "$?" in the failing case if the `status=$?` assignment was part
of the &&-chain. Since such constructs are manually checking the exit
code, their &&-chain breakage is legitimate and safe, thus should not be
flagged. Therefore, stop flagging &&-chain breakage in such cases.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
---
 t/chainlint.pl                        |  6 ++++++
 t/chainlint/chain-break-status.expect |  9 +++++++++
 t/chainlint/chain-break-status.test   | 11 +++++++++++
 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 t/chainlint/chain-break-status.expect
 create mode 100644 t/chainlint/chain-break-status.test

diff --git a/t/chainlint.pl b/t/chainlint.pl
index ba3fcb0c8e6..14e1db3519a 100755
--- a/t/chainlint.pl
+++ b/t/chainlint.pl
@@ -497,6 +497,12 @@ sub accumulate {
 	# did previous command end with "&&", "|", "|| return" or similar?
 	goto DONE if match_ending($tokens, \@safe_endings);
 
+	# if this command handles "$?" specially, then okay for previous
+	# command to be missing "&&"
+	for my $token (@$cmd) {
+		goto DONE if $token =~ /\$\?/;
+	}
+
 	# flag missing "&&" at end of previous command
 	my $n = find_non_nl($tokens);
 	splice(@$tokens, $n + 1, 0, '?!AMP?!') unless $n < 0;
diff --git a/t/chainlint/chain-break-status.expect b/t/chainlint/chain-break-status.expect
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..f4bada94632
--- /dev/null
+++ b/t/chainlint/chain-break-status.expect
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+OUT=$(( ( large_git ; echo $? 1 >& 3 ) | : ) 3 >& 1) &&
+test_match_signal 13 "$OUT" &&
+
+{ test-tool sigchain > actual ; ret=$? ; } &&
+{
+	test_match_signal 15 "$ret" ||
+	test "$ret" = 3
+} &&
+test_cmp expect actual
diff --git a/t/chainlint/chain-break-status.test b/t/chainlint/chain-break-status.test
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..a6602a7b99c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/t/chainlint/chain-break-status.test
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+# LINT: broken &&-chain okay if next command handles "$?" explicitly
+OUT=$( ((large_git; echo $? 1>&3) | :) 3>&1 ) &&
+test_match_signal 13 "$OUT" &&
+
+# LINT: broken &&-chain okay if next command handles "$?" explicitly
+{ test-tool sigchain >actual; ret=$?; } &&
+{
+	test_match_signal 15 "$ret" ||
+	test "$ret" = 3
+} &&
+test_cmp expect actual
-- 
gitgitgadget


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-09-01  0:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-01  0:29 [PATCH 00/18] make test "linting" more comprehensive Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 01/18] t: add skeleton chainlint.pl Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01 12:27   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-09-02 18:53     ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 02/18] chainlint.pl: add POSIX shell lexical analyzer Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01 12:32   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-09-03  6:00     ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 03/18] chainlint.pl: add POSIX shell parser Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 04/18] chainlint.pl: add parser to validate tests Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 05/18] chainlint.pl: add parser to identify test definitions Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 06/18] chainlint.pl: validate test scripts in parallel Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01 12:36   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-09-03  7:51     ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-06 22:35   ` Eric Wong
2022-09-06 22:52     ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-06 23:26       ` Jeff King
2022-11-21  4:02         ` Eric Sunshine
2022-11-21 13:28           ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-11-21 14:07             ` Eric Sunshine
2022-11-21 14:18               ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-11-21 14:48                 ` Eric Sunshine
2022-11-21 18:04           ` Jeff King
2022-11-21 18:47             ` Eric Sunshine
2022-11-21 18:50               ` Eric Sunshine
2022-11-21 18:52               ` Jeff King
2022-11-21 19:00                 ` Eric Sunshine
2022-11-21 19:28                   ` Jeff King
2022-11-22  0:11                   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 07/18] chainlint.pl: don't require `return|exit|continue` to end with `&&` Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 08/18] t/Makefile: apply chainlint.pl to existing self-tests Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 09/18] chainlint.pl: don't require `&` background command to end with `&&` Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget [this message]
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 11/18] chainlint.pl: don't flag broken &&-chain if failure indicated explicitly Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 12/18] chainlint.pl: complain about loops lacking explicit failure handling Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 13/18] chainlint.pl: allow `|| echo` to signal failure upstream of a pipe Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 14/18] t/chainlint: add more chainlint.pl self-tests Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 15/18] test-lib: retire "lint harder" optimization hack Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 16/18] test-lib: replace chainlint.sed with chainlint.pl Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-03  5:07   ` Elijah Newren
2022-09-03  5:24     ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 17/18] t/Makefile: teach `make test` and `make prove` to run chainlint.pl Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-01  0:29 ` [PATCH 18/18] t: retire unused chainlint.sed Eric Sunshine via GitGitGadget
2022-09-02 12:42   ` several messages Johannes Schindelin
2022-09-02 18:16     ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-02 18:34       ` Jeff King
2022-09-02 18:44         ` Junio C Hamano
2022-09-11  5:28 ` [PATCH 00/18] make test "linting" more comprehensive Jeff King
2022-09-11  7:01   ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-11 18:31     ` Jeff King
2022-09-12 23:17       ` Eric Sunshine
2022-09-13  0:04         ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7df396ddea4cdaf9d014bb90a38da010676c1ce8.1661992197.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --to=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=avarab@gmail.com \
    --cc=fs@gigacodes.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.