From: Benoit Sigoure <tsuna@lrde.epita.fr>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:47:12 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix and improve t7004
Message-ID: <225E846F-7EDB-4B57-923C-909F3F000D82@lrde.epita.fr>
In-Reply-To: <20071116213538.GA30076@glandium.org>

On Nov 16, 2007, at 10:35 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 10:31:15PM +0100, Benoit Sigoure wrote:
>> On Nov 16, 2007, at 10:11 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 10:04:57PM +0100, Benoit Sigoure wrote:
>>>> On Nov 16, 2007, at 9:28 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>>>>  test_expect_success \
>>>>>  	'message in editor has initial comment' '
>>>>>  	GIT_EDITOR=cat git tag -a initial-comment > actual || true &&
>>>>> -	test $(sed -n "/^\(#\|\$\)/p" actual | wc -l) -gt 0
>>>>> +	( read empty ;
>>>>> +	  [ "$empty" ] && exit 1 ;
>>>>
>>>> What is this meant to do?  Did you mean [ -n "$empty" ] ?
>>>
>>> Replacing with [ -n "$empty" ] would not work properly, except if  
>>> you
>>> replace the following ; with &&. Does that really make a readability
>>> difference ?
>>
>> I don't get it.  As far as I understand, you're trying to check  
>> whether
>> $empty is indeed empty, right?  So how is `[ "$empty" ]' meant to  
>> work?
>>   [ -n "$empty" ] && exit 1
>>
>> will exit 1 if empty isn't empty.
>
> Sorry, I read '-z', not '-n'. [ "$empty" ] and [ -n "$empty" ] are the
> same thing.

Heh, forgive my ignorance, I did not know the [ "string" ] notation.   
Amazing, after all these years of shell scripting...

-- 
Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna
EPITA Research and Development Laboratory