From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 17:03:55 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] implement test_might_fail using a refactored test_must_fail
Message-ID: <20151128170355.GB27264@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <56584E92.1030103@ramsayjones.plus.com>

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:37:38PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote:

> > -	if test $exit_code = 0; then
> > +	if ! list_contains "$_test_ok" success && test "$exit_code" -eq 0
> > +	then
> 
> minor nit:
> 
> I would prefer this was 'if test $exit_code -eq 0 && ! list_contains ...'
> 
> ie. the test on exit code comes first (and no need for the double quotes).
> The whole if..elif.. chain is about testing the exit code, with a couple
> of exceptions ...

I agree, it makes the logic a bit easier to follow. I've tweaked it
while applying; no need to re-send.

> The same comment applies to the second patch with exit code 141/SIGPIPE.

Got that one, too.

-Peff