From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>,
git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] test-lib: user-friendly alternatives to test [!] [-d|-f]
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 00:21:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTimiSJQPcZRZ06BamJPkd8PBkm7CaMcsKRSdEeP_@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100806225705.GA2534@burratino>
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 22:57, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthieu Moy wrote:
> - test_file_exists <name> [<diagnosis>]
> - test_dir_exists <name> [<diagnosis>]
>
> Check that <name> exists and is a file or directory,
> printing a diagnostic if it does not. The <diagnosis>
> if present will be used to give some added context to
> the diagnostic.
>
> - test_does_not_exist <name> [<diagnosis>]
>
> Check that <name> does not exist, printing a
> diagnostic if it does. The <diagnosis> will be
> printed on failure as added context if present.
>
> I think the ..._must_exist names put the emphasis in the
> wrong place, and they look funny in "if" statements.
Personally I'd prefer something where I can just think in the "test"
bultin terms and still get debug info, something like (pseduocode)
gittest() {
test "$#" = 3 && { bool='!'; shift; } || bool=
test=$1; shift
args="$@"; shift
case "$test" in
-f)
# Handle the common case of -f with a custom message
;;
-d)
# Same for -d
;;
*)
# Just pass a switch to test and say "test with the -X
switch", or something
esac
}
gittest ! -f ~/.gitconfig
gittest -f ~/.gitconfig
gittest -d /tmp
gittest ! -d /tmp
gittest -s /tmp
I'll never be able to fit more test_* functions in my brain, and I
wrote the docs :)
> Style nitpick: if statementss in the test-lib have tended to look like
>
> if [ foo ]
> then
> bar
> fi
>
> so far. Here the whole function is a glorified "test -f", so I wonder
> if
>
> [ -f "$1" ] ||
> {
> echo >&2 "file $1 doesn't exist. $*"
> false
> }
>
> would not be clearer. I dunno.
This is the style we usually use:
if ! test -f "$1"
then
echo >&2 "file $1 doesn't exist. $*"
false
fi
> I have often run into silent test failures of the sort your patch
> is designed to avoid. Thanks for tackling it.
Yeah, having more intra-test progress is definitely good. Right now I
just remove things from the tests in an ad-hoc fashion until they
start passing if they fail when I debug them.
I mentioned that we could emit these test progress reports as TAP in a
previous E-Mail. Here's how that could look like:
$ perl -MTest::More=no_plan -E '
subtest "A git test" => sub {
pass("doing test -f file");
pass("git commit ...");
pass("test_tick...");
done_testing();
} for 1 .. 2
'
ok 1 - doing test -f file
ok 2 - git commit ...
ok 3 - test_tick...
1..3
ok 1 - A git test
ok 1 - doing test -f file
ok 2 - git commit ...
ok 3 - test_tick...
1..3
ok 2 - A git test
1..2
I.e. we could make these intra-test progress reports machine readable.
As the example shows the obvious next step would be to make other
utility functions like test_commit() emit a progress status as well.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-07 0:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-05 13:00 [PATCH] rebase -i: add exec command to launch a shell command Matthieu Moy
2010-08-05 13:31 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-08-05 16:47 ` Matthieu Moy
2010-08-05 16:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Matthieu Moy
2010-08-05 16:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] test-lib: user-friendly alternatives to test [!] [-d|-f] Matthieu Moy
2010-08-05 17:03 ` [PATCH v2] " Matthieu Moy
2010-08-06 22:57 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-08-07 0:21 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
2010-08-09 16:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Junio C Hamano
2010-08-10 11:00 ` [PATCH] test-lib: user-friendly alternatives to test [-d|-f|-e] Matthieu Moy
2010-08-10 11:11 ` Joshua Juran
2010-08-10 11:18 ` [PATCH v3] " Matthieu Moy
2010-08-05 18:24 ` [PATCH] rebase -i: add exec command to launch a shell command Erik Faye-Lund
2010-08-05 18:37 ` Jacob Helwig
2010-08-05 20:16 ` Junio C Hamano
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=AANLkTimiSJQPcZRZ06BamJPkd8PBkm7CaMcsKRSdEeP_@mail.gmail.com \
--to=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).