Re: [PATCH v14 4/6] parse-options.c: make OPTION_COUNTUP respect "unspecified" values

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:39 AM, Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:02 PM, Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> +test_expect_success 'OPT_COUNTUP() resets to 0 with --no- flag' '
>>>>> +       test-parse-options --no-verbose >output 2>output.err &&
>>>>> +       test_must_be_empty output.err &&
>>>>> +       test_cmp expect output
>>>>> +'
>>>>
>>>> In my v12 review, I noticed that neither --no-verbose nor --no-quiet
>>>> was being tested by t0040 (which is conceptually independent of the
>>>> OPT__COUNTUP change) and suggested[3] that you add a new patch to
>>>> address that shortcoming. This idea was followed up by [1] saying that
>>>> this test (here) could then be dropped since the case it checks would
>>>> already be covered by the new patch. My impression was that you
>>>> agreed[4] that that made sense, however, this test is still here. Did
>>>> I misunderstand your response[4]?
>>>>
>>>> [1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/290662
>>>> [2]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/289991
>>>> [3]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/290655
>>>> [4]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/290787
>>>
>>> I actually did include the tests in the patch 3/6[1]. I mentioned in
>>> my response[2] that I will include the tests between 2/5 and 3/5.
>>> Since, after that no email was exchanged, I thought you agreed.
>>
>> I'm not sure that I understand what you are saying since the
>> --no-verbose test does not seem to be included in the patch you cite
>> (it is instead in the present patch under discussion).
>>
>> Perhaps there is some miscommunication and misunderstanding.
>
> Sorry for being a bit unclear.
> I will explain this. The patch 3/6 contains the test which tests the
> quiet option thus in turn testing whether the variable quiet becomes 0
> with --no flag. This patch ie. 4/6 contains the test which tests the
> verbose options thus in turn testing whether the variable verbose
> becomes 0 with no flag. Both of them test different behavior as quiet
> is initially 0 while verbose is initially -1.
>
> So finally what I wanted to achieve is that I should test --no-quiet
> in 3/6 as till then this new behavior is not yet introduced. Thus, it
> will confirm the wanted behavior which exists before 4/6.
>
> This patch introduces a test to verify whether --no-verbose makes the
> variable 0. This patch introduces a new "unspecified" behavior. Thus
> we can test this new behavior with this.
>
> I hope now it is a bit clear on what I want to do.