On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 13:11 +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > It is a bit dissapointing that we do not need to touch tests, as it > indicates that the logic to diagnose extra arguments as an error has > no coverage. Even if there were tests I don't think they would have needed any updation as most of the tests (at least those that I came across) that check for failure seem not to be checking for what error message gets printed. They seem to test only if the command fails (using test_must_fail in most cases, I guess). Moreover, as a consequence of my assumption that the tests don't check for the error messages themselves; I haven't even thought of checking whether the tests or the travis-ci build succeeded as a consequence of my patches that touch "only" the error messages! --- Kaartic
