On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 12:23:47PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ run_completion ()
> >> > test_completion ()
> >> > {
> >> > test $# -gt 1 && echo "$2" > expected
> >> > - run_completion "$@" &&
> >> > + run_completion $1 &&
> >> > test_cmp expected out
> >> > }
> >>
> >> I can understand the other three hunks, but this one is fishy.
> >> Shouldn't "$1" be inside a pair of dq? I.e.
> >>
> >> + run_completion "$1" &&
> >
> > No. $1 holds all words on the command line. If it was between a pair
> > of dq, then the whole command line would be passed to the completion
> > script as a single word.
>
> And these "words" can be split at $IFS boundaries without any
> issues? IOW, nobody would ever want to make words array in the
> run_completion function to ['git' 'foo bar' 'baz']?
It might be simpler to just convert test_completion into the
test_completion_long I added in my series; the latter takes the expected
output on stdin, leaving the actual arguments free to represent the real
command-line. E.g., your example would become:
test_completion git "foo bar" baz <<-\EOF
... expected output ...
EOF
-Peff
--
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