On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 2:19 AM Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Am 19.06.19 um 01:12 schrieb Eric Sunshine: > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 8:24 AM Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget > > <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> printf ".git\nfatal: Needed a single revision\n" >expect && > >> - test_cmp expect output.txt > >> + sort <output.txt >output.sorted && > >> + test_cmp expect output.sorted > > > > It was quite surprising to see this sorting only 'output' but not > > 'expect'. I see now that 'output' is already "sorted" (in that sense), > > but it feels fragile. More robust would be to sort 'expect' as well: > > > > printf ".git\nfatal: Needed a single revision\n" | sort >expect && > > Following Dscho's recent objection elsewhere that tests tend to check > for much more than regressions, wouldn't it be logical to write these as > > grep -F .git" output.txt && > test_i18n_grep "Needed a single rev" output.txt > > without an 'expect' file at all? I considered suggesting that, as well, as being more obvious and less fragile (with the exception that "Needed a single rev" isn't currently localizable in builtin/rev-parse.c, so plain 'grep' instead of 'test_i18n_grep').
