Re: [PATCH 5/7] t0000: verify that real_path() works correctly with absolute paths
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 9, 2012, 05:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vvcfnsr3l.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vfw6ru7de.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> (4) if it only runs once at the very beginning of the test and sets > a variable that is named prominently clear what it means and lives > throughout the test, then we do not even have to say "hopefully" and > appear lazy and loose to the readers of the test who wonders what > happens when the path does exist; doing so will help reducing the > noise on the mailing list in the future.
Having said that, I really do not deeply care either way. If you are rerollilng the series for other changes, I wouldn't shed tears even if I do not see any change to this part.