On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 06:59:27PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > >> diff --git a/t/t4052-stat-output.sh b/t/t4052-stat-output.sh >> index 9f563db20a..1e62333b46 100755 >> --- a/t/t4052-stat-output.sh >> +++ b/t/t4052-stat-output.sh >> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ do >> test_cmp expect actual >> ' >> done <<\EOF >> -format-patch -1 --stdout >> +format-patch --stat=80 -1 --stdout >> diff HEAD^ HEAD --stat >> show --stat >> log -1 --stat > > This hunk confused me. I think what is going on is this: > > - we have a loop that runs the same test on several commands > > - that loop expects format-patch, diff, etc, to have the same output > > - now that format-patch differs from the other commands in its default > length, we need to use a manual --stat-width to get identical output > > It seems like that kind of nullifies the point of some of the tests in > the loop, though, since they are meant to check the behavior without > --stat. > > OTOH, I think that case is tested later (in the other tests you > adjusted). So I guess these tests are just covering the "name vs bar > length" part? My bad. My thought was.. "Hmm.. I would need to take format-patch out out the loop since it won't match exactly 80 columns anymore. That's a lot of work. Hey how about using this opportunity to test that --stat= can still override default settings?" I didn't realize the follow tests in that loop set stat width. I'll take format-patch out of the loop and deal with it separately. -- Duy
