Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> .... I had a look
> at some of the conversions with your test_todo --want/--expect/--reset
> and found the result really hard to follow. Junio's suggestions chimed
> with some things I've been thinking about so I had a go at
> implementing it and doing some sample conversions (see below). Marking
> the individual commands that should fail is a big step forward and the
> failing commands are checked to make sure they don't segfault etc.
;-)
Another small detail in my suggestion that will make a huge
difference in the end is not to introduce test_expect_todo as a
separate top-level construct, and instead teach test_expect_success
to pay attention to the use of test_todo "unfortunately this does
not work yet" mark in it. It allows us to use test_todo in a shared
test helper function and call them in test_expect_success, and when
the step the test helper has trouble with gets fixed, the "unmark"
step will be an isolated change.
Your sample change seems to already have it, which is good.
> diff --git a/t/test-lib-functions.sh b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> index 0f439c99d6..deb74a22f3 100644
> --- a/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> +++ b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> @@ -739,6 +739,7 @@ test_expect_failure () {
> }
> test_expect_success () {
> + test_todo_=
> test_start_
> test "$#" = 3 && { test_prereq=$1; shift; } || test_prereq=
> test "$#" = 2 ||
> @@ -750,7 +751,12 @@ test_expect_success () {
> say >&3 "expecting success of $TEST_NUMBER.$test_count '$1': $2"
> if test_run_ "$2"
> then
> - test_ok_ "$1"
> + if test -n "$test_todo_"
> + then
> + test_known_broken_failure_ "$1"
> + else
> + test_ok_ "$1"
> + fi
> else
> test_failure_ "$@"
> fi
