Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Added tests for reset -

From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Date: Mar 10, 2015, 18:05 UTC
Message-ID: <CAPig+cSqJcfNRXmLdHXvHvUiv1NFgXA6cZ4YFyxoWuyivjWUEQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAODo60p_2deueOS5nYfHPTMas=GcHR4n8dNs8HJt-ZR+2SifzA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudshekhar02@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Matthieu Moy
> <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>> Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudshekhar02@gmail.com> writes:
>>> +test_expect_success 'reset - in the presence of file named - with previous branch' '
>>> +     echo "Unstaged changes after reset:" >expect &&
>>> +     echo "M -" >>expect &&
>>> +     echo "M 1" >>expect &&
>>
>> Here and elsewhere: why not
>>
>>         cat >expect <<-EOF
>>         Unstaged changes after reset:
>>         M -
>>         M 1
>>
>> ?
> I was confused whether to use cat or echo. I thought using cat will
> disrupt the indentation as the EOF needs to be on a single line. This
> is why I chose echo. Please let me know your thoughts on this.

Here-docs are easier to compose and read than individual 'echo' statements for multi-line content.

The '-' in front of EOF allows you to indent the entire body. Even better, use -\EOF to signify that you don't expect any interpolation to occur within the body.