[PATCH 2/4] tests: replace chainlint subshell with a function
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Mar 28, 2023, 20:23 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20230328202302.GB1241631@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20230328202043.GA1241391@coredump.intra.peff.net>
To test that we don't break the &&-chain, test-lib.sh does something like:
(exit 117) && $test_commands
and checks that the result is exit code 117. We don't care what that initial command is, as long as it exits with a unique code. Using "exit" works and is simple, but is a bit expensive since it requires a subshell (to avoid exiting the whole script!). This isn't usually very noticeable, but it can add up for scripts which have a large number of tests.
Using "return" naively won't work here, because we'd return from the function eval-ing the snippet (and it wouldn't find &&-chain breakages). But if we further push that into its own function, it does exactly what we want, without extra subshell overhead.
According to hyperfine, this produces a measurable improvement when running t3070 (which has 1800 tests, all of them quite short):
'HEAD' ran
1.09 ± 0.01 times faster than 'HEAD~1'Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> --- t/test-lib.sh | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh index 09789566374..cfcbd899c5a 100644 --- a/t/test-lib.sh +++ b/t/test-lib.sh @@ -1086,6 +1086,10 @@ test_eval_ () { return $test_eval_ret_ } +fail_117 () { + return 117 +} + test_run_ () { test_cleanup=: expecting_failure=$2 @@ -1097,7 +1101,7 @@ test_run_ () { trace= # 117 is magic because it is unlikely to match the exit # code of other programs - if test "OK-117" != "$(test_eval_ "(exit 117) && $1${LF}${LF}echo OK-\$?" 3>&1)" + if test "OK-117" != "$(test_eval_ "fail_117 && $1${LF}${LF}echo OK-\$?" 3>&1)" then BUG "broken &&-chain or run-away HERE-DOC: $1" fi
-- 2.40.0.616.gf524ec75088