On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:44:48PM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > All that was over a year and a half ago, and these limitations weren't > a maintenance burden at all so far, and nobody needed that escape > hatch. > > Well, nobody except me, that is :) When I saw back then that t1510 > saves the stderr of nested function calls with 7 parameters, I > shrugged in disgust, admitted defeat, and simply reached for that > escape hatch: partly because I couldn't be bothered to figure out how > that test script works, but more importantly because I didn't want to > risk that any cleanup inadvertently hides a bug in the future. > > So that's the only user that piece of code ever had, and I certainly > hope that no other test script will ever grow so complicated that it > will need this escape hatch. I would actually prefer to remove it, > but t1510 must be cleaned up first... so I'm afraid it will be with > us for a while. I'm actually surprised we haven't run into it more. We have some custom test scripts in our fork of Git at GitHub. We usually just use TEST_SHELL_PATH=bash, but curious, I tried running with dash and "-x", and three of them failed. Probably they'd be easy enough to fix (and they're out of tree anyway), so I'm not really arguing against the escape hatch exactly. Mostly I'm just surprised that if I introduced 3 cases (out of probably a dozen scripts), I'm surprised that more contributors aren't accidentally doing so upstream. -Peff
