Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] modernize t7300

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

James <rouzier@gmail.com> writes:

> From: James Rouzier <rouzier@gmail.com>
>
> ---

Missing sign-off.

>  t/t7300-clean.sh | 382 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
>  1 file changed, 190 insertions(+), 192 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t7300-clean.sh b/t/t7300-clean.sh
> index 86ceb38..d555bb6 100755
> --- a/t/t7300-clean.sh
> +++ b/t/t7300-clean.sh
> @@ -28,15 +28,15 @@ test_expect_success 'git clean with skip-worktree .gitignore' '
>  	mkdir -p build docs &&
>  	touch a.out src/part3.c docs/manual.txt obj.o build/lib.so &&
>  	git clean &&
> -	test -f Makefile &&
> -	test -f README &&
> -	test -f src/part1.c &&
> -	test -f src/part2.c &&
> -	test ! -f a.out &&
> -	test ! -f src/part3.c &&
> -	test -f docs/manual.txt &&
> -	test -f obj.o &&
> -	test -f build/lib.so &&
> +	test_path_is_file Makefile &&
> +	test_path_is_file README &&
> +	test_path_is_file src/part1.c &&
> +	test_path_is_file src/part2.c &&

OK.

> +	test_path_is_missing a.out &&
> +	test_path_is_missing src/part3.c &&

This is better than the original, which may have said "OK" upon
seeing a directory called "a.out".

> +	test_path_is_file docs/manual.txt &&
> +	test_path_is_file obj.o &&
> +	test_path_is_file build/lib.so &&

OK.

>  	git update-index --no-skip-worktree .gitignore &&
>  	git checkout .gitignore
>  '
> @@ -46,15 +46,15 @@ test_expect_success 'git clean' '
>  	mkdir -p build docs &&
>  	touch a.out src/part3.c docs/manual.txt obj.o build/lib.so &&
>  	git clean &&
> -	test -f Makefile &&
> -	test -f README &&
> -	test -f src/part1.c &&
> -	test -f src/part2.c &&
> -	test ! -f a.out &&
> -	test ! -f src/part3.c &&
> -	test -f docs/manual.txt &&
> -	test -f obj.o &&
> -	test -f build/lib.so
> +	test_path_is_file Makefile &&
> +	test_path_is_file README &&
> +	test_path_is_file src/part1.c &&
> +	test_path_is_file src/part2.c &&
> +	test_path_is_missing a.out &&
> +	test_path_is_missing src/part3.c &&
> +	test_path_is_file docs/manual.txt &&
> +	test_path_is_file obj.o &&
> +	test_path_is_file build/lib.so

The verbosity of this conversion makes me wonder if we want to have
"test_paths_are_files" and "test_paths_are_missing".  For that
matter, this test does not really care about the distinction between
files and directories (e.g. some tests said "test ! -d docs" and
would have passed if there were a 'docs' regular file, but what we
really care about is the path 'docs' is _gone_), so what we want may
be test_paths_exist and test_paths_are_missing.  With that, the
above hunk would become

	test_paths_exist Makefile README src/part1.c src/part2.c \
		obj.o build/lib.so &&
        test_paths_are_missing a.out src/part3.c

I dunno.

>  test_expect_success 'git clean -e' '
>  	rm -fr repo &&
>  	mkdir repo &&
> -	(
> -		cd repo &&
> -		git init &&
> -		touch known 1 2 3 &&
> -		git add known &&
> -		git clean -f -e 1 -e 2 &&
> -		test -e 1 &&
> -		test -e 2 &&
> -		! (test -e 3) &&
> -		test -e known
> -	)
> +	cd repo &&
> +	git init &&
> +	touch known 1 2 3 &&
> +	git add known &&
> +	git clean -f -e 1 -e 2 &&
> +	test_path_is_file 1 &&
> +	test_path_is_file 2 &&
> +	test_path_is_missing 3 &&
> +	test_path_is_file known
>  '

I think this is wrong.  The next test piece will be run inside
"repo" directory with this patch applied.  Don't lose the subshell
here.