From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 20:51:20 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] t3300-*.sh: Fix a TAP parse error
Message-ID: <20120725205120.GD4732@burratino>
In-Reply-To: <501043D9.70604@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>

Hi,

Ramsay Jones wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:

>> 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