From: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:50:42 GMT Subject: Re: Incremental updates to What's cooking Message-ID: <4F4E2D32.9030209@in.waw.pl> In-Reply-To: <7vbooiuj6z.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> On 02/29/2012 09:39 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: > >> On 02/28/2012 07:53 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> * zj/diff-stat-dyncol (2012-02-27) 11 commits >>> - diff --stat: add config option to limit graph width >>> - diff --stat: enable limiting of the graph part >>> - diff --stat: add a test for output with COLUMNS=40 >>> - diff --stat: use a maximum of 5/8 for the filename part >>> - merge --stat: use the full terminal width >>> - log --stat: use the full terminal width >>> - show --stat: use the full terminal width >>> - diff --stat: use the full terminal width >>> - diff --stat: tests for long filenames and big change counts >>> - t4014: addtional format-patch test vectors >>> - Merge branches zj/decimal-width, zj/term-columns and jc/diff-stat-scaler >>> >>> I resurrected the additional tests for format-patch from an earlier round, >>> as it illustrates the behaviour change brought by "5/8 split" very well. >> Hi, >> the resurrected tests are partly duplicated in 4052-stat-output.sh: >> >> t4014: >> ok 75 - small change with long name gives more space to the name >> ok 76 - a long name is given more room when the bar is short >> ok 77 - format patch --stat-width=width works with long name * >> ok 78 - format patch --stat=...,name-width with long name * >> ok 79 - format patch --stat-name-width with long name * >> ok 81 - format patch graph part width * >> ok 82 - format patch ignores COLUMNS * >> ok 83 - format patch --stat=width with big change * >> ok 84 - format patch --stat-width=width with big change * >> ok 85 - partition between long name and big change is more balanced >> >> t4052: >> ok 3 - format-patch graph width defaults to 80 columns >> ok 4 - format-patch --stat=width with long name >> ok 5 - format-patch --stat-width=width with long name >> ok 6 - format-patch --stat=...,name-width with long name >> ok 7 - format-patch --stat-name-width with long name >> ok 24 - format-patch ignores too many COLUMNS (big change) >> ok 28 - format-patch ignores not enough COLUMNS (big change) >> ok 29 - format-patch ignores statGraphWidth config >> ok 36 - format-patch --stat=width with big change >> ok 37 - format-patch --stat-width=width with big change >> ok 38 - format-patch --stat-graph--width with big change >> ok 49 - format-patch --stat=width with big change and long name >> ok 53 - format-patch ignores COLUMNS (long filename) >> >> The ones with * are duplicated exactly. They tests run very fast, but >> maybe the duplicated ones should be culled. > > Yeah, probably we should de-dup them. > > Compare the behaviour change shown for t4052 and for t4014 by 119c07bf. > Which one more obviously show the effect of the code change to allow the > reader judge if the behaviour change is going in a good direction? t4014 it seems, but mostly because of more descriptive test names. But this is only true for the ones without *, I think. So the ones with * can be deleted without losing this advantage. The ones with * are very similar in t4014 and t4052. > The style used in t4052 only changes expect_failure to expect_success, and > the reader has to accept the judgement of the person who wrote the test > vector and declared "this is the _right_ output!". The way t4014, taken > from your earlier round, shows the behaviour change shows how the > expectation changes from the old behaviour to the new one, and the reader > can see and decide which one is giving a better output. > > Actually, the whole reason I didn't notice duplicates in 4052 was because > of the above X-<. > > If we remove duplicates, will 4052 become empty? It would be really nice > if we do not have to add a new test script for this series, and instead > add necessary new tests to existing scripts. t4052 tests show, log, merge, diff and format-patch with basically the same commands. Separating the tests into different files would require duplicating a lot of setup code. OTOH, t4014 is only about format-patch, so the other ones don't fit. I thought it would be better to create a new file. - Zbyszek