Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] t6301: for-each-ref tests for ref-filter APIs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> +test_expect_success 'setup some history and refs' '
> +	test_commit one &&
> +	test_commit two &&
> +	test_commit three &&
> +	git checkout -b side &&
> +	test_commit four &&
> +	git checkout master &&
> +	git update-ref refs/odd/spot master

I think you want more corner-cases here. For example,
refs/headsfoo/master should not match refs/heads, and it's easy to write
an incorrect implementation for this => test.

> +'
> +test_expect_success 'filtering by leading name' '

Blank line between tests please.

> +	cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
> +	refs/heads/master
> +	refs/heads/side
> +	EOF
> +	git for-each-ref --format="%(refname)" refs/heads >actual &&
> +	test_cmp expect actual
> +'

Isn't this test redundant with the content of t6300-for-each-ref.sh?

At this point, you've done only internal refactoring, so you shouldn't
need new tests (except to fix coverage holes in existing tests).

I guess you're adding this to build more tests on top, but the commit
message should clarify this.

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]