On Wed, Apr 06 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>>> + cat >expect && >>>> + cat <&6 >expect.-d && >>>> + cat <&7 >expect.-r && >>>> + cat <&8 >expect.-t && >>> >>> Let's not go too cute like this. This forces the caller to remember >>> which among 6, 7, and 8 corresponds to which option. It is too ugly >>> to live. >> >> I think it's rather elegant actually, but to be fair it would, per: >> >> git grep '<&[1-9]| [1-9]<<-' >> >> Be the user with the most FD's using this sort of pattern. > > Please give a clear explanation why "-d" has to be 6, "-r" 7 and > "-t" 8, that can be used by developers as a memory aid to help them > write new tests using the helper. It's documented when test-lib.sh does the redirection, since Fabian Stelzer's a6714088e0c (test-lib: make BAIL_OUT() work in tests and prereq, 2021-12-01). I guess a bit of archane knowledge not documented there is that FD #5 is used for the test-lib.sh itself, e.g. BUG(), so if you want that to work properly you can't touch it. But everything as of #6 is generally fair game, secondary helpers like "test_pause" won't work properly, but as far as the test framork is concerned 6-9 is good. So I don't really have a better explanation the same on as why pick "int i" rather than "int x", it's just the prevailing pattern. > Or justify why the developers have to memorize such a meaningless > correspondence, if there is no any good reason. Explained above, I think. > Alternatively, you can stop abusing the word "elegant". It is not a > synonym to "what I wrote" ;-). The "elegant" part is getting away with passing structured data into a shell function, which it's generally resistant to. As much as I'd like to take credit from it I just picked it up from code Ilya wrote in 0445e6f0a12 (test-lib: '--run' to run only specific tests, 2014-04-30). I didn't know about it before then. In any case, you merged down Josh's version without these tests for rc1, so I'm assuming that's a "no" to the upthread "if you'd like to pick this up with the version with the tests at all" in the context of the RC period. So I think we can table this for now, or would you like a version of this without (a)use of these file descriptors to pass in arguments?
