[PATCH] t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh: use the $(...) construct for command substitution

[PATCH] t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh: use the $(...) construct for command substitution

[Elia Pinto]

    The Git CodingGuidelines prefer the $(...) construct for command
    substitution instead of using the backquotes `...`.

    The backquoted form is the traditional method for command
    substitution, and is supported by POSIX.  However, all but the
    simplest uses become complicated quickly.  In particular, embedded
    command substitutions and/or the use of double quotes require
    careful escaping with the backslash character.

    The patch was generated by:

        for _f in $(find . -name "*.sh")
        do
           shellcheck -i SC2006 -f diff ${_f} | ifne git apply -p2
        done

    and then carefully proof-read.

Signed-off-by: Elia Pinto <gitter.spiros@gmail.com>
---
 t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh
index 5b81a130e9..479db32cd6 100755
--- a/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh
+++ b/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh
@@ -4421,14 +4421,14 @@ test_setup_12c1 () {
 
 		git checkout A &&
 		git mv node2/ node1/ &&
-		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side A >>$i; done &&
+		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side A >>$i; done &&
 		git add -u &&
 		test_tick &&
 		git commit -m "A" &&
 
 		git checkout B &&
 		git mv node1/ node2/ &&
-		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side B >>$i; done &&
+		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side B >>$i; done &&
 		git add -u &&
 		test_tick &&
 		git commit -m "B"
@@ -4511,7 +4511,7 @@ test_setup_12c2 () {
 
 		git checkout A &&
 		git mv node2/ node1/ &&
-		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side A >>$i; done &&
+		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side A >>$i; done &&
 		git add -u &&
 		echo leaf5 >node1/leaf5 &&
 		git add node1/leaf5 &&
@@ -4520,7 +4520,7 @@ test_setup_12c2 () {
 
 		git checkout B &&
 		git mv node1/ node2/ &&
-		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side B >>$i; done &&
+		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side B >>$i; done &&
 		git add -u &&
 		echo leaf6 >node2/leaf6 &&
 		git add node2/leaf6 &&
@@ -4759,7 +4759,7 @@ test_setup_12f () {
 		echo g >dir/subdir/tweaked/g &&
 		echo h >dir/subdir/tweaked/h &&
 		test_seq 20 30 >dir/subdir/tweaked/Makefile &&
-		for i in `test_seq 1 88`; do
+		for i in $(test_seq 1 88); do
 			echo content $i >dir/unchanged/file_$i
 		done &&
 		git add . &&
-- 
2.32.0

Re: [PATCH] t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh: use the $(...) construct for command substitution

[Derrick Stolee]

On 2/22/2022 3:46 AM, Elia Pinto wrote:
>     The Git CodingGuidelines prefer the $(...) construct for command
>     substitution instead of using the backquotes `...`.
> 
>     The backquoted form is the traditional method for command
>     substitution, and is supported by POSIX.  However, all but the
>     simplest uses become complicated quickly.  In particular, embedded
>     command substitutions and/or the use of double quotes require
>     careful escaping with the backslash character.

This message has some strange left-padding. Could you reduce that
whitespace for the majority of your message? 

>     The patch was generated by:
> 
>         for _f in $(find . -name "*.sh")
>         do
>            shellcheck -i SC2006 -f diff ${_f} | ifne git apply -p2
>         done

Having some left-padding makes sense for this example.

Also, thanks for sharing this automation!
 
>     and then carefully proof-read.
> -		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side A >>$i; done &&
> +		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side A >>$i; done &&

> -		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side B >>$i; done &&
> +		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side B >>$i; done &&

> -		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side A >>$i; done &&
> +		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side A >>$i; done &&

> -		for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side B >>$i; done &&
> +		for i in $(git ls-files); do echo side B >>$i; done &&

> -		for i in `test_seq 1 88`; do
> +		for i in $(test_seq 1 88); do

These changes make sense. Thanks!
-Stolee