From: Brandon Casey Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:17:12 GMT Subject: [PATCH] t/README: clarify test_must_fail description Message-ID: <0JXkybOAPrkw1RCkgKLY0ocfkmfqHFq_bWFMVWrzymAet2VX-veTSoZP1hBzIyN5JSrPw-IZjfI@cipher.nrlssc.navy.mil> In-Reply-To: <20100720163822.GA8492@localhost.localdomain> From: Brandon Casey Some have found the wording of the description to be somewhat ambiguous with respect to when it is desirable to use test_must_fail instead of "! ". Tweak the wording somewhat to hopefully clarify that it is _because_ test_must_fail can detect segmentation fault that it is desirable to use it instead of "! ". Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey --- On 07/20/2010 11:38 AM, Jared Hance wrote: > I think the wording of description of test_must_fail is slightly > ambiguous. I read it to mean that: > > Use test_must_fail only when you are testing to see if git will > segfault. I think that is a correct interpretation. But I ask you this: Are there times when we would _not_ want to test for segfault? :) > Rather than: > > Use test_must_fail to be safe from git segfaults. > > > Perhaps the description should be updated to be a bit more clear? How about this? t/README | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/README b/t/README index b906ceb..a830daa 100644 --- a/t/README +++ b/t/README @@ -451,8 +451,8 @@ library for your script to use. - test_must_fail Run a git command and ensure it fails in a controlled way. Use - this instead of "! " to fail when git commands - segfault. + this instead of "! " since it will fail when git + commands segfault. - test_might_fail -- 1.6.6.2