Re: [PATCH v5] ls-files: introduce "--format" option

From: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 11, 2022, 15:27 UTC
Message-ID: <CAOLTT8Ss53yXw3bo58dHwoTWaX3wS880qKF8AXQ5KbZeTB2eUA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220705192839.irfrfx4z6jwimcmu@tb-raspi4>

Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> 于2022年7月6日周三 03:28写道：

Show 39 quoted lines

>
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 06:32:40AM +0000, ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > From: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com>
> >
> > Add a new option --format that output index enties
> > informations with custom format, taking inspiration
> > from the option with the same name in the `git ls-tree`
> > command.
> []
> > +FIELD NAMES
>
> Nice
>
> > +-----------
> > +Various values from structured fields can be used to interpolate
> > +into the resulting output. For each outputting line, the following
> > +names can be used:
> > +
> > +objectmode::
> > +     The mode of the file which is recorded in the index.
> > +objectname::
> > +     The name of the file which is recorded in the index.
> > +stage::
> > +     The stage of the file which is recorded in the index.
> > +eolinfo:index::
> > +eolinfo:worktree::
> > +     The <eolinfo> (see the description of the `--eol` option) of
> > +     the contents in the index or in the worktree for the path.
> > +eolattr::
> > +     The <eolattr> (see the description of the `--eol` option)
> > +     that applies to the path.
>
> This may be a matter of taste, looking at the eol-stuff:
> Should the ':' be dropped and we have 3 fieldnames like this:
>
> eolindex
> eolworktree
> eolattr
>

Let's see the document of --eol in git-ls-files.txt:

--eol::
     Show <eolinfo> and <eolattr> of files.
     <eolinfo> is the file content identification used by Git when
     the "text" attribute is "auto" (or not set and core.autocrlf is not false).
     <eolinfo> is either "-text", "none", "lf", "crlf", "mixed" or "".

There mentioned eolinfo and eolattr many times, so let's keep it.

Show 33 quoted lines

> > +test_expect_success 'git ls-files --format eolinfo:index' '
> > +     cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
> > +     lf
> > +     lf
> > +     EOF
> > +     git ls-files --format="%(eolinfo:index)" >actual &&
> > +     test_cmp expect actual
> > +'
> > +
> > +test_expect_success 'git ls-files --format eolinfo:worktree' '
> > +     cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
> > +     lf
> > +     lf
> > +     EOF
> > +     git ls-files --format="%(eolinfo:worktree)" >actual &&
> > +     test_cmp expect actual
> > +'
> > +
> > +test_expect_success 'git ls-files --format eolattr' '
> > +     printf "\n\n" >expect &&
> > +     git ls-files --format="%(eolattr)" >actual &&
> > +     test_cmp expect actual
> > +'
> > +
>
> What exactly should this testcases test ?
> Does it make sense to set up a combination of index, worktree, attr,
> which are happening in real live ?
>
> There are some tests in t0025, t0027 and t0028 that do more
> realistic tests of different combinations.
>
>

Origin test is not good, But now I decide use Avar's patch version:

-test_expect_success 'git ls-files --format eolattr' '
-       printf "\n\n" >expect &&
-       git ls-files --format="%(eolattr)" >actual &&
+HT='   '
+WS='    '
+test_expect_success 'git ls-files --format v.s. --eol' '
+       git ls-files --eol >expect 2>err &&
+       test_must_be_empty err &&
+       git ls-files
--format="i/%(eolinfo:index)${WS}w/%(eolinfo:worktree)${WS}attr/${WS}${WS}${WS}${WS}
${HT}%(path)" >actual 2>err &&
+       test_must_be_empty err &&
        test_cmp expect actual

it can compare the output of git ls-files --format with git ls-files --eol.

Thanks for review!

ZheNing Hu