Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] test-lib-functions: introduce test_line_count_cmd
- From
Andrei Rybak <rybak.a.v@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 24, 2021, 19:23 UTC
- Message-ID
- <6ad6ac5a-18ac-102e-29dc-3c0987de08e7@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <54bf7756-5578-4fe4-dbe5-f63b368c4d63@gmail.com>
On 21/06/2021 11:08, Andrei Rybak wrote:
Show 93 quoted lines
> On 19/06/2021 03:30, Đoàn Trần Công Danh wrote:
>> diff --git a/t/test-lib-functions.sh b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
>> index f0448daa74..e055a4f808 100644
>> --- a/t/test-lib-functions.sh
>> +++ b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
>> @@ -845,6 +845,86 @@ test_line_count () {
>> fi
>> }
>> +# test_line_count_cmd checks the exit status, and the number of lines in
>> +# the captured stdout of a command.
>> +#
>> +# SYNOPSIS:
>> +#
>> +# test_line_count_cmd <binop> <value> [!] cmd [args...]
>> +#
>> +# Expect succeed exit status when running
>> +#
>> +# cmd [args...]
>> +#
>> +# then, run sh's "test <# of lines in stdout> <binop> <value>"
>> +#
>> +# OPTIONS:
>> +# !:
>> +# Instead of expecting "cmd [args...]" succeed, expect its failure.
>> +# Note, if the command under testing is "git",
>> +# test_must_fail should be used instead of "!".
>> +#
>> +# EXAMPLE:
>> +# test_line_count_cmd -ge 10 git tag --no-contains v1.0.0
>> +# test_line_count_cmd -le 10 ! grep some-text a-file
>> +# test_line_count_cmd = 0 test_must_fail git rev-parse --verify
>> abcd1234
>> +#
>> +# NOTE:
>> +# * a temporary file named test_line_count_cmd_.out will be created
>> under
>> +# $TRASH_DIRECTORY/.git/trash iff $TRASH_DIRECTORY/.git/ exists.
>> +# Otherwise, created in $TRASH_DIRECTORY. This temporary file will be
>> +# cleaned by test_when_finished
>> +test_line_count_cmd () {
>> + {
>> + local outop outval outfile
>> + local expect_failure actual_failure
>> + local trashdir="$TRASH_DIRECTORY"
>> +
>> + if test -d "$TRASH_DIRECTORY/.git"
>> + then
>> + trashdir="$TRASH_DIRECTORY/.git/trash" &&
>> + mkdir -p "$trashdir"
>> + fi &&
>> + if test $# -lt 3
>> + then
>> + BUG "missing <binary-ops> and <value>"
>
> Nit: s/binary-ops/binop/ for consistency with documentation comment
> above. Also, technically the invocation of test_line_count_cmd could be
> missing any of its required three parameters, including "cmd". How
> about something similar to the call to BUG in test_i18ngrep:
>
> BUG "too few parameters to test_line_count_cmd"
>
> ?
>
>> + fi &&
>> + outop="$1" &&
>> + outval="$2" &&
>> + shift 2 &&
>> + outfile="$trashdir/test_line_count_cmd_.out" &&
>> + if test "x$1" = "x!"
>> + then
>> + shift &&
>> + expect_failure=yes
>> + fi &&
>> + if test $# = 0
>> + then
>> + BUG "test_line_count_cmd: no command to be run"
>> + else
>> + test_when_finished "rm -f '$outfile'" &&
>> + exec 8>"$outfile"
>> + # We need to redirect stderr to &9,
>> + # and redirect this function's 9>&2
>> + # in order to not messed with -x
>> + if ! "$@" >&8 2>&9
>> + then
>> + actual_failure=yes
>> + fi
>> + fi 8>&1 &&
>> + case "$expect_failure,$actual_failure" in
>> + yes,)
>> + echo >&4 "error: '$@' succeed!" &&
>
> It seems that function error() could be used here and below instead of
> "echo >&4".After spending some time reading t/test-lib-functions.sh, now I don't think that using error() is a good suggestion. Closest relatives of test_line_count_cmd -- test_line_count and test_must_be_empty -- both just use "echo". Other usages of error() in t/test-lib.sh and t/test-lib-functions.sh suggest that error() is not meant to be used for reporting test failure messages, but internal failures. For example:
error "You haven't built things yet, have you?"
and
error "Internal error: $stderr disappeared."
> s/succeed/succeeded/ --- it might be worth borrowing wording from > test_must_fail(). Something like: > > error "test_line_count_cmd: command succeeded: '$@'"