Re: [PATCH 2/5] completion: fix args of run_completion() test helper

> >> And these "words" can be split at $IFS boundaries without any
> >> issues?  IOW, nobody would ever want to make words array in the
> >> run_completion function to ['git' 'foo bar' 'baz']?
> >
> > It might be simpler to just convert test_completion into the
> > test_completion_long I added in my series; the latter takes the expected
> > output on stdin, leaving the actual arguments free to represent the real
> > command-line. E.g., your example would become:
> >
> >   test_completion git "foo bar" baz <<-\EOF
> >   ... expected output ...
> >   EOF
> 
> I realize that the way my question was stated was misleading.  It
> was not meant as a rhetorical "You would never be able to pass
> ['git' 'foo bar' 'baz'] with that interface, and the patch sucks."
> but was meant as a pure question "Do we want to pass such word
> list?".  "test_completion is almost always used to test completion
> with inputs without any $IFS letters in it, so not being able to
> test such an input via this interface is fine. If needed, we can
> give another less often used interface to let you pass such an
> input" is perfectly fine by me.

> >> >  test_completion ()
> >> >  {
> >> >  	test $# -gt 1 && echo "$2" > expected
> >> > -	run_completion "$@" &&
> >> > +	run_completion $1 &&
> >> >  	test_cmp expected out
> >> >  }
> 
> I wonder if doing something like this would be a far simpler
> solution:
> 
> 	test_completion ()
>         {
> 		case "$1" in
>                 '')
> 			;;
> 		*)
> 			echo "$1" >expect &&
> 	                shift
>                         ;;
> 		esac &&
>                 run_completion "$@" &&
>                 test_cmp expect output
> 	}