On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 5:39 AM Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [...]
> For bulk creation, we can do much better by using fast-import, but it's
> often a pain to generate the input. Let's provide a helper to do so.
> [...]
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> diff --git a/t/test-lib-functions.sh b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> @@ -233,6 +233,137 @@ test_merge () {
> +# Similar to test_commit, but efficiently create <nr> commits, each with a
> +# unique number $n (from 1 to <nr> by default) in the commit message.
> +#
> +# Usage: test_commit_bulk [options] <nr>
> +# [...]
> +#
> +# The message, filename, and contents strings are evaluated by the shell inside
> +# double-quotes, with $n set to the current commit number. So you can do:
> +#
> +# test_commit_bulk --filename=file --contents='modification $n'
Considering that test_commit_bulk() is intended to be used within a
test body, and considering that test bodies are almost always
encapsulated in single quotes, recommending single quoting the value
of --contents= seems contraindicated. Double quotes likely would be
better.
> +# to have every commit touch the same file, but with unique content. Spaces are
> +# OK, but you must escape any metacharacters (like backslashes or
> +# double-quotes) you do not want expanded.
> +#
> +test_commit_bulk () {
> + [...]
> + in_dir=${indir:+-C "$indir"}
Doesn't this suffer the problem in which some older/broken
shells[1][2][3][4] incorrectly expand this to:
"-C <dir>"
rather than the expected:
-C "<dir>"
? Is this something we still care about?
Same comment applies to other instances of ${indir:+-C "$indir"} below.
[1]: http://public-inbox.org/git/20160517215214.GA16905@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
[2]: http://public-inbox.org/git/e3bfc53363b14826d828e1adffbbeea@74d39fa044aa309eaea14b9f57fe79c/
[3]: http://public-inbox.org/git/20160518010609.Horde.sM8QUFek6WMAAwho56DDob8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
[4]: http://public-inbox.org/git/1240044459-57227-1-git-send-email-ben@xxxxxxx/
