Re: [PATCH v4] add-patch: response to unknown command

From: phillip.wood123@gmail.com <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 24, 2024, 10:15 UTC
Message-ID: <41d23496-0bd3-47c7-a470-39334588f520@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqv849xups.fsf@gitster.g>

Hi Junio

On 22/04/2024 16:50, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 29 quoted lines

> Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> 1:  0317594bce ! 1:  b418b03f15 add-patch: response to unknown command
>>      @@ t/t3701-add-interactive.sh: test_expect_success 'warn about add.interactive.useB
>>       +	test_when_finished "git reset --hard; rm -f command" &&
>>       +	echo W >command &&
>>       +	git add -N command &&
>>      -+	cat >expect <<-EOF &&
>>      -+	diff --git a/command b/command
>>      -+	new file mode 100644
>>      -+	index 0000000..a42d8ff
>>      -+	--- /dev/null
>>      -+	+++ b/command
>>      -+	@@ -0,0 +1 @@
>>      -+	+W
>>      ++	git diff command >expect &&
>>      ++	cat >>expect <<-EOF &&
>>       +	(1/1) Stage addition [y,n,q,a,d,e,p,?]? Unknown command ${SQ}W${SQ} (use ${SQ}?${SQ} for help)
>>       +	(1/1) Stage addition [y,n,q,a,d,e,p,?]?$SP
>>       +	EOF
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> My first reaction was "how is this different from checking just the
> last line of the actual output?  The early part of expect and actual
> both come from an internal invocation of 'git diff', and they must
> match by definition".
> 
> But that may really be the point of this test.

Yes - we want to make sure that we are not printing the help and the only way to do that is to check the whole output

Best Wishes

Phillip

> That is, we may later decide to tweak the way "git diff" hunks are
> presented, and we expect that the way "git add -p" presents the
> hunks would change together with it automatically.