Hi Junio,
> Le 12 oct. 2020 à 18:24, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
> "Philippe Blain via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> - for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
>> - if (r[i] == '\n')
>> - r[i] = ' ';
>> + for (int i = 0; i < len; i++) {
>
> We do not allow this in our codebase (yet).
>
> cf. Documentation/CodingGuidelines
>
> - Declaring a variable in the for loop "for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)"
> is still not allowed in this codebase.
Indeed. Will fix (and re-read the guidelines).
>
>> diff --git a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh
>> index 71818b90f0..c06eca774f 100755
>> --- a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh
>> +++ b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh
>> @@ -3,13 +3,11 @@
>> test_description='git branch display tests'
>> . ./test-lib.sh
>> . "$TEST_DIRECTORY"/lib-terminal.sh
>> +. "$TEST_DIRECTORY"/lib-crlf-messages.sh
>>
>> test_expect_success 'make commits' '
>> - echo content >file &&
>> - git add file &&
>> - git commit -m one &&
>> - echo content >>file &&
>> - git commit -a -m two
>> + test_commit one &&
>> + test_commit two
>> '
>
> What does this change have to do with the topic at hand?
In the previous iteration, the expected output of one of the tests
I was adding had commit hashes,
so the change above was necessary to make those hashes reproducible.
However in this series I removed the hashes from the expected output
because it would break the "linux-clang" CI job which runs with SHA-256.
Maybe we should add a note in t/README specifically saying that raw commit
hashes should not appear in expected output, but use $(git rev-parse "${ref}")
instead ? Could this be a preparatory patch, or would deserve a separate topic ?
