From: Jeff King Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 17:59:45 GMT Subject: Re: test &&-chain lint Message-ID: <20150320175945.GA11844@peff.net> In-Reply-To: On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 10:34:51AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > Your case above is actually better spelled as test_expect_code, but > > there are more complex one-off cases that I solved using a {} block. > > Just for the record, test_expect_code expects only one possible good > exit status and it does not allow us to say "0 is OK and 1 is also > OK, everything else is bad", so it is not quite appropriate there. Oh, sorry, I misread your test as expecting 1, but it is actually expecting 0 or 1. Yeah, I agree this is the exact sort of case covered in my patch 11/25 (and there are only 4 instances in the whole test suite). -Peff