Re: [RFC/PATCH] t3300-*.sh: Fix a TAP parse error
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jul 25, 2012, 20:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20120725205120.GD4732@burratino>
- In-Reply-To
- <501043D9.70604@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
Hi,
Ramsay Jones wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
>> Observing that all well-written test scripts we have begin with this >> boilerplate line: >> >> test_expect_success setup ' >> >> I wouldn't mind introducing a new helper function test_setup that >> behaves like test_expect_success but is meant to be used in the >> first "set-up" phase of the tests in a test script.
Neat. This could be used for later set-up tests, too, perhaps with a long-term goal of making non set-up tests independent of each other (reorderable and skippable).
[...]
> [1] For example, what should/will happen if someone uses test_must_fail, > test_might_fail, etc., within the test_fixture script? Should they simply > be banned within a text_fixture?
Why wouldn't they act just like they do in test_expect_success blocks?
FWIW I find Junio's test_setup name more self-explanatory. What mnemonic should I be using to remember the _fixture name?
Thanks, Jonathan