Re: [PATCH 8/8] one ugly test to verify basic functionality

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 5, 2016, 13:02 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8C2+kaPLALojJoFe+T=WoeyQ8JsB0zenDzQt3wpi9D=tw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+EOSBnZVuHThXLg9+VftPVaKy5wqqxp=iQtP1ZUtxkKq32HMQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Elia Pinto <gitter.spiros@gmail.com> wrote:

>> +       mv `ls .git/objects/pack/*.pack` pack &&
>
> No, please. From the git coding guideline : "We prefer $( ... ) for
> command substitution; unlike ``, it properly nests.

I was being too subtle with the word "ugly". I assure you this test cannot be merged in its current form.

But that's not important. It makes me think, can we catch `..` automatically? I know the test suite can catch broken && command sequence. Maybe we can do the same for`..`?

> It should have been the way Bourne spelled it from day one, but
> unfortunately isn't."
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4708549/whats-the-difference-between-command-and-command-in-shell-programming

-- 
Duy