Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> git show -s --pretty=oneline "$r" >raw && >> - cat raw | lf_to_nul || exit 1 >> + cat raw | lf_to_nul || return 1 >> done >expect && > > Using `return 1` here is "obviously correct" since this code is not > inside a subshell. Furthermore, the exit code of the for-loop itself > is not being lost down a pipe, so `return 1` is indeed an appropriate > way to signal failure. Good. "return 1" is obvious and safe correction. I have to wonder if test_expect_success can be taught to be smarter to intercept "exit" so we do not have to bo so careful, but that would be a much more involved change to the lower-level of test framework.
