Re: [OUTREACHY][PATCH v1] t7006: Use test_path_is_* functions in test script

> `test -e <path>` checks whether <path> exists and exits 0 if it does and
> the shell treats an exit code of 0 as success. `!` inverts the
> success/failure of the command that follows it. Using that and looking
> at the definition of test_file_is_missing in t/test-lib-functions.sh see
> if you can fix the conversion so that the tests pass.

> Hi Joey
>
> On 20/10/2020 08:24, Joey S wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> > Thank you very much for the input and feedback, it's much appreciated.
> >
> > > All this text above is useful context for reviewers but appears as part
> > > of the commit message which is not what you want. If you add notes after
> > > the `---` line below then they will not end up in the commit message.
> >
> > Understood, thank you.
> >
> > > > Modernized the test by replacing 'test -e' instances with
> > > > test_path_is_file helper functions.
> > >
> > > s/Modernized/Modernize/
> > > Will do in the amended commit next.
> >
> > > > -   ! test_path_is_file paginated.out
> > >
> > > It would be better to replace`! test -e` this with
> > > `test_path_is_missing` as the modified test will pass if paginated.out
> > > exists but is not a file. `test_path_is_missing` will print an
> > > appropriate diagnostic message as well.
> >
> > Thank you for the explanation : )
> > After replacing `! test -e` with `! test_path_is_missing paginated.out` however, the changed test cases are failing;
> >
> >     $ cd t/ && prove t7006-pager.sht7006-pager.sh .. Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
> >     Failed 3/101 subtests
> >
> >     Test Summary Report
> >     -------------------
> >     t7006-pager.sh (Wstat: 256 Tests: 101 Failed: 3)
> >        Failed tests:  7-9
> >        Non-zero exit status: 1
> >     Files=1, Tests=101,  5 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr  0.00 sys +  3.49 cusr  0.65 csys =  4.17 CPU)
> >     Result: FAIL
> >
> >
> > Is this the behavior I should be expecting?
>
> No it's not! As one aspect of this process is to help candidates improve
> their understanding I'll give you a hint rather than the whole answer.
> `test -e <path>` checks whether <path> exists and exits 0 if it does and
> the shell treats an exit code of 0 as success. `!` inverts the
> success/failure of the command that follows it. Using that and looking
> at the definition of test_file_is_missing in t/test-lib-functions.sh see
> if you can fix the conversion so that the tests pass. If you get stuck
> do let me know and I'll try and help some more.
>
> Best Wishes
>
> Phillip
>
> > > ...Alternatively, this would fit just fine in a cover letter. Usually
> > > cover letters are not necessary for single patches (where the patch
> > > message itself conveys the full message, or a little bit of additional
> > > context below the triple-dash line is all that's necessary to clarify
> > > the intent). But, if you want to introduce yourself, a 0/1 cover letter
> > > is fine, too.
> >
> > Will keep this in mind, thank you Taylor.
> >
> > > > One thing missed by other commenters: the Developer's Certificate of
> > > > Origin line - which is what this indicates - should have your "full
> > > > name".
> > >
> > > ... and it must match the authorship.
> >
> > Changed, thank you both for catching that.
> > Thank you all,
> > Joey
> > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> > On Monday, October 19, 2020 7:59 PM, Junio C Hamano gitster@pobox.com wrote:
> >
> > > Emily Shaffer emilyshaffer@google.com writes:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:26:07AM +0000, Joey S wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > Hi Joey and welcome.
> > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: JoeyS jgsal@yahoo.com
> > > >
> > > > One thing missed by other commenters: the Developer's Certificate of
> > > > Origin line - which is what this indicates - should have your "full
> > > > name".
> > >
> > > ... and it must match the authorship.
> > >
> > > > So in my case, I sign my patches 'Emily Shaffer
> > > > emilyshaffer@google.com'. If I'm wrong that's fine, but JoeyS sounds
> > > > like a name and initial rather than a full name.
> > >
> > > Thanks for pointing it out.
> > > If somebody from the "mentoring" group is taking a tally, it might
> > > not be a bad idea to identify which style and procedure rules are
> > > often failed to be followed by new contributors so that we can
> > > figure out ways to make them stand out in our documentation set
> > > (e.g. Documentation/SubmittingPatches but maybe a separate cheat
> > > sheet might be worth having).
> > > Thanks.