On 11/10/20 3:38 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > I had suggested an improvement for this hunk as well as for the test case. > Fell through the cracks? You guessed it right. My apologies. > +test_expect_success 'difftool --cached with unmerged files' ' > + test_when_finished git reset --hard && > + echo base >file && > + git add file && > + git commit -m base && > > This does not advance the committer date. Let's just use the helper > function we invented to make this much easier: > > test_commit base > > This has also the advantage of already tagging the outcome. > >> + git checkout -B conflict-a && >> + git checkout -B conflict-b && >> + git checkout conflict-a && >> + echo conflict-a >>file && >> + git add file && >> + git commit -m conflict-a && >> + git checkout conflict-b && >> + echo conflict-b >>file && >> + git add file && >> + git commit -m conflict-b && >> + git checkout master && >> + git merge conflict-a && >> + test_must_fail git merge conflict-b && >> + : >expect && >> + git difftool --cached --no-prompt >actual && >> + test_cmp expect actual > > Shouldn't this use the `test_must_be_empty` function instead? > > How about writing the test case this way: > > test_expect_success 'difftool --cached with unmerged files' ' > test_when_finished git reset --hard && > > test_commit conflicting && > test_commit conflict-a a conflicting.t && > git reset --hard conflicting && > test_commit conflict-b b conflicting.t && > test_must_fail git merge conflict-a && > > git difftool --cached --no-prompt >out && > test_must_be_empty out > ' The original test code was copied from the "difftool --dir-diff with unmerged files" case above. It might be worth cleaning it up too, but let's leave it for another time. I'm keeping the return-early code as per Junio's request. -- Jinoh Kang Theori
