On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:31:32PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > One of my goals was to provide a more generic helper so that we don't
> > have to make little helpers like this for every command. So I'd much
> > rather something like:
> >
> > test_output () {
> > printf "%s\n" "$1" >expect &&
> > shift &&
> > "$@" >output &&
> > test_cmp expect output
> > }
>
> I agree with the principle in general.
>
> Unfortunately that wouldn't help here --- the "$@" is a command with a
> pipe to sed in it and we still lose the exit status from
> count-objects.
Thanks, I missed that subtlety from what you posted earlier. That's
another good reason that something like test_output is not really
sufficient (you could eval() a snippet of shell, but then we have not
really improved on the "verbose test $a = $b" version, since as you note
we are still missing the exit code).
-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