Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> Am 5/16/2013 22:50, schrieb Thomas Rast:
>>>> +match_pattern_list () {
>>>> + arg="$1"
>>>> + shift
>>>> + test -z "$*" && return 1
>>>> + for pat in $@
>>>
>>> You should have double-quotes around $@ here, but then you can just as
>>> well abbreviate to
>>>
>>> for pat
>>>
>>> and you don't need the 'test -z "$*' check anymore.
>>
>> Hmm, actually the quotes wouldn't help, because it currently reads
>>
>> - for skp in $GIT_SKIP_TESTS
>> - do
>> - case $this_test.$test_count in
>> - $skp)
>> - to_skip=t
>> - break
>> - esac
>> - done
[...]
>> But the 'for pat' with implicit $@ sounds nice regardless, thanks.
>
> 'for pat' is equivalent to 'for pat in "$@"', not 'for pat in $@';
> would it still be useful when you need them split at $IFS?
At this point the splitting has already happened in the caller when it
does the (refactored)
+ if match_pattern_list $this_test.$test_count $GIT_SKIP_TESTS
So $@ and "$@" is actually the same thing.
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
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