Ãvar ArnfjÃrà Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:23, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> test_expect_success 'git diff --quiet HEAD^^ HEAD^' '
>> - test_must_fail git diff --quiet HEAD^^ HEAD^
>> + check_exit_status 1 git diff --quiet HEAD^^ HEAD^
>> '
>
> In most uses of check_exit_status you're using it is the very last
> command within a test_expect_success. Isn't it redundant to using just
> "test_expect_code $code ..." there?
Doesn't
test_expect_code 1 'phoney' '
foo && bar && (exit 1)
'
incorrectly succeed if "foo" or "bar" happened to fail with exit status 1?
> So IMO the best thing to do would be to re-appropriate
> "test_expect_code" so that it runs inside a test (i.e. does what your
> check_exit_status does), and not at the top-level.
I like it. It should have been done the way you suggest from the
beginning. It is unfortunate that we didn't think of wrappers like
test_must_fail and friends when we originally did test_expect_code, but it
is never too late to correct that mistake.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html