How to re-use setups in multiple tests?

How to re-use setups in multiple tests?

[Tom Clarke]

I'm wondering if there's a pattern for re-using setups across several
tests, similar to how a setUp function is used in xUnit. The problem
is I need the setup to actually be re-run, for each test to start from
a clean slate, so using the following doesn't work as the setup is
just run before the first test.

test_expect_success setup '
     # setup repostory to a particular state
'
test_expect_success test1 '
    # some test that expects the state to be as defined in setup, and
changes state of repository
'

test_expect_success test2 '
    # another test that expects the state to be as defined in setup
'

Is there a convention for doing this that's already used? Perhaps
pulling the setup code into a function or duplicating the code? Or is
it better to create a separate test file for tests that need to be
isolated?

Thanks,

-Tom

Re: How to re-use setups in multiple tests?

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Tom Clarke wrote:

> I'm wondering if there's a pattern for re-using setups across several 
> tests, similar to how a setUp function is used in xUnit. The problem is 
> I need the setup to actually be re-run, for each test to start from a 
> clean slate, so using the following doesn't work as the setup is just 
> run before the first test.

We typically do the clean up phase explicitely.  Or avoid it.

Example: you want to do something to a branch, but the next step should 
use the original state of the branch.

Solution: "git checkout -b new-branch HEAD~5"

Sorry, unless you are a little less mysterious about the exact use case 
you have in mind, I cannot help more.

Ciao,
Dscho

Re: How to re-use setups in multiple tests?

[Tom Clarke]

In this case the first test rebases the branch created in setup (it's
testing the rebase merge strategy), the second test should do the same
thing, except check there is a warning if a --message option is
passed.

I suppose I could find the old pre-rebase head and work with that, but
that doesn't seem that clean to me.

Here's the code (non-working):

#!/bin/sh

test_description='merge-rebase backend test'

. ./test-lib.sh

test_expect_success setup '
        echo hello >a &&
        git add a &&
        test_tick && git commit -m initial &&

        git checkout -b branch &&
        echo hello >b &&
        git add b &&
        test_tick && git commit -m onbranch &&

        git checkout master &&
        echo update >a &&
        git add a &&
        test_tick && git commit -m update
'

test_expect_success 'merging using rebase does not create merge
commit' '
        git checkout branch &&
        git merge -s rebase master &&

        ( git log --pretty=oneline ) >actual &&
        (
                echo "4db7a5a013e67aa623d1fd294e8d46e89b3ace8f
onbranch"
                echo "893371811dbd13e85c098b72d1ab42bcfd24c2db update"
                echo "0e960b10429bf3f1e168ee2cc7d531ac7c622580
initial"
        ) >expected &&
        git diff -w -u expected actual
'

test_expect_success 'merging using rebase with message gives warning'
'
        #doesn't work because the branch has already been rebased and
is therefore up to date
        git checkout branch &&
        git merge -m "a message" -s rebase master 2>&1 expected &&
        (
                echo "warning: Message is not used for rebase merge
strategy"
        ) >expected &&
        git diff -w -u expected actual
'

test_done


-Tom

On 10/1/07, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Tom Clarke wrote:
>
> > I'm wondering if there's a pattern for re-using setups across several
> > tests, similar to how a setUp function is used in xUnit. The problem is
> > I need the setup to actually be re-run, for each test to start from a
> > clean slate, so using the following doesn't work as the setup is just
> > run before the first test.
>
> We typically do the clean up phase explicitely.  Or avoid it.
>
> Example: you want to do something to a branch, but the next step should
> use the original state of the branch.
>
> Solution: "git checkout -b new-branch HEAD~5"
>
> Sorry, unless you are a little less mysterious about the exact use case
> you have in mind, I cannot help more.
>
> Ciao,
> Dscho
>
>

Re: How to re-use setups in multiple tests?

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Tom Clarke wrote:

> In this case the first test rebases the branch created in setup (it's 
> testing the rebase merge strategy), the second test should do the same 
> thing, except check there is a warning if a --message option is passed.
> 
> I suppose I could find the old pre-rebase head and work with that, but 
> that doesn't seem that clean to me.

You can use "git reset --hard master@{1}", and it really escapes me why 
this should not be clean, and why you want to jump through hoops instead 
using a much more complicated technique.

Ciao,
Dscho

Re: How to re-use setups in multiple tests?

[Tom Clarke]

On 10/1/07, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> > I suppose I could find the old pre-rebase head and work with that, but
> > that doesn't seem that clean to me.
>
> You can use "git reset --hard master@{1}", and it really escapes me why
> this should not be clean, and why you want to jump through hoops instead
> using a much more complicated technique.

That'll be because my git knowledge isn't good enough to make it
clean. Thanks for the suggestion :-)

-Tom

Re: How to re-use setups in multiple tests?

[Karl Hasselström]

On 2007-10-01 14:46:46 +0200, Tom Clarke wrote:

> On 10/1/07, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > > I suppose I could find the old pre-rebase head and work with
> > > that, but that doesn't seem that clean to me.
> >
> > You can use "git reset --hard master@{1}", and it really escapes
> > me why this should not be clean, and why you want to jump through
> > hoops instead using a much more complicated technique.
>
> That'll be because my git knowledge isn't good enough to make it
> clean. Thanks for the suggestion :-)

Another even more foolproof way would be to have the setup create a
(lightweight) tag, and let each subtest reset to that tag.

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle