From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 16:48:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] test-lib: refactor $GIT_SKIP_TESTS matching
Message-ID: <7vfvxl1rj9.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <87y5beav7d.fsf@linux-k42r.v.cablecom.net>

Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch> writes:

> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes:
>
>> Am 5/16/2013 22:50, schrieb Thomas Rast:
>>> +match_pattern_list () {
>>> +	arg="$1"
>>> +	shift
>>> +	test -z "$*" && return 1
>>> +	for pat in $@
>>
>> You should have double-quotes around $@ here, but then you can just as
>> well abbreviate to
>>
>> 	for pat
>>
>> and you don't need the 'test -z "$*' check anymore.
>
> Hmm, actually the quotes wouldn't help, because it currently reads
>
> -	for skp in $GIT_SKIP_TESTS
> -	do
> -		case $this_test.$test_count in
> -		$skp)
> -			to_skip=t
> -			break
> -		esac
> -	done
>
> so the splitting already happens, and in fact needs to, so that one can
> pass multiple patterns.  Or am I missing something?

I think you read it right.  I do pass multiple test number patterns
regularly and not quoting there is exactly for support that.

> But the 'for pat' with implicit $@ sounds nice regardless, thanks.

'for pat' is equivalent to 'for pat in "$@"', not 'for pat in $@';
would it still be useful when you need them split at $IFS?