On 13.12.2021 09:27, Eric Sunshine wrote:
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 5:22 AM Fabian Stelzer <fs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 13.12.2021 01:30, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> check-chainlint:
>+ sed -e '/^# LINT: /d' $(patsubst %,chainlint/%.test,$(CHAINLINTTESTS)) >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/tests && \
>+ cat $(patsubst %,chainlint/%.expect,$(CHAINLINTTESTS)) >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/expect && \
>+ $(CHAINLINT) '$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/tests >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/actual && \
>+ diff -u '$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/expect '$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/actual
If I read this right you are relying on the order of the .test & .expect
files to match. I did something similar in a test prereq which resulted in a
bug when setting the test_output_dir to something residing in /dev/shm,
since the order of files in /dev/shm is reversed (at least on some
platforms). Even though this should work as is I could see this leading to a
similar bug in the future.
It's not seen in the patch context, but earlier in the file we have:
CHAINLINTTESTS = $(sort $(...,$(wildcard chainlint/*.test)))
which provides stability via `sort`, thus ensures that the order of
the ".test" and ".expect" match.
I think that addresses your concern (unless I misunderstand your observation).
Yes, thats what i meant. I didn't realize $CHAINLINTTESTS is already the
sorted glob. Thanks for clarifying.
Personally i find the initial for loop variant to be the most readable.
Ævars makefile targets could be very nice too, but especially:
+$(BUILT_CHAINLINTTESTS): | .build/chainlint
+$(BUILT_CHAINLINTTESTS): .build/%.actual: %
+ $(CHAINLINT) <$< | \
+ sed -e '/^# LINT: /d' >$@ && \
+ diff -u $(basename $<).expect $@
i find very hard to grasp :/
I have no idea what is going on here: `<$< |` ?
