Re: [PATCH 1/6] t0080: move expected output to a file

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Jul 1, 2024, 03:20 UTC
Message-ID: <20240701032047.GA610406@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <c60c78c7-a029-48e8-840a-45dcc785a6e5@web.de>

On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 05:35:31PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:

> Provide the expected output of "test-tool example-tap" verbatim instead
> of as a here-doc, to avoid distractions due to quoting, variables
> containing quotes and indentation.

I'm not really opposed to this patch, but I wondered...

>  test_expect_success 'TAP output from unit tests' '
> -	cat >expect <<-EOF &&
> -	ok 1 - passing test
> -	ok 2 - passing test and assertion return 1

If you could take the test input on stdin, like so:

  test_expect_success 'TAP output from unit tests' - <<-\EOT
	cat >expect <<-\EOF
	ok 1 - passing test
	ok 2 - passing test and assertion return 1
	[...]
	# check "'a' == '\n'" failed at t/helper/test-example-tap.c:64
	#    left: 'a'
	#   right: '\012'
	[...]
	EOF
  EOT

would that be preferable to moving it to its own file? I kind of like keeping everything in the test scripts themselves so related changes can happen side-by-side, though I admit in this case it is intimately tied to the separate test-example-tap.c source anyway.

But I do have such an "EOT" patch which I've been meaning to send out, since it makes many of these quoting annoyances go away (though of course it leaves the indentation).

-Peff