Re: [GSOC][RFC PATCH 0/1] microproject: use test_path_is_* functions in test scripts

From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Date: Feb 19, 2024, 19:36 UTC
Message-ID: <CAPig+cSOsGAizKJdeX9Qb45LqsKOzpEO+1Pxhd2e205ndeHngg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240219172214.7644-1-vincenzo.mezzela@gmail.com>

On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 12:22 PM Vincenzo Mezzela <vincenzo.mezzela@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Would you like to see something like
> '''
> test_path_is_missing file1 &&
> test_path_is_file file2 &&
> test_path_is_missing file3 &&
> test_path_is_file file5
> '''
> changed into
> '''
> test_path_is_file file2 &&
> test_path_is_file file5 &&
> test_path_is_missing file3 &&
> test_path_is_missing file1
> '''
> where all the test_path_is_file are grouped before and followed by all
> the test_path_is_missing (or the other way around) to enhance
> readability of the code?

Generally speaking, no, reviewers would not want to see such a change because "enhanced readability" is often quite subjective. More importantly, though, reviewers would especially not want this done in the same patch which changes `test -blah` to `test_path_foo` because it make it harder for the reviewer to associate and verify each `test -blah` to `test_path_foo` replacement in the final result with the source statement in the original file. It's much easier for a reviewer to validate old against new when there is an obvious one-to-one correspondence.