Re: [PATCH] git-mv: improve error message for conflicted file

From: Chris Torek <chris.torek@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 18, 2020, 01:35 UTC
Message-ID: <CAPx1GvduDZw5pmfZHACDGZsMR5YYDowLw6+az+oL6oWLvDyCFA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cQaqg7MbyNZakuWVzezhPCXu=LonCVAw_p13c=0YNBdPw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 4:47 PM Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:

> Style: write `!ce` rather than `ce == NULL`:

OK, but I'll go with Junio's suggestion of getting `ce` once and then checking `ce_staged` anyway. (I'm used to a different style guide that frowns on `if (ce)` and `if (!ce)`...)

Show 5 quoted lines

> As for bikeshedding the message itself, perhaps:
>
>     _("conflicted");
>
> Though, perhaps that's too succinct.

Maybe.  Succinct is usually good though.

Show 6 quoted lines

> > +       touch conflicted &&
>
> If the timestamp of the file is not relevant to the test -- as is the
> case here -- then we avoid using `touch`. Instead:
>
>     >conflicted &&

OK.

> ... use literal TABs and let the here-doc provide the newlines.

I personally hate depending on literal tabs, as they're really hard to see. If q_to_tab() is OK I'll use that.

Show 11 quoted lines

> I realize that this test script is already filled with this sort of
> thing where actions are performed outside of tests, however, these
> days we frown upon that, and there really isn't a good reason to avoid
> taking care of this clean up via the modern idiom of using
> test_when_finished(), which you would call immediately after creating
> the file in the test. So:
>
>     ...
>     >conflicted &&
>     test_when_finished "rm -f conflicted" &&
>     ...

Indeed, that's where I copied it from.

Should I clean up other instances of separated-out `rm -f`s in this file in a separate commit?

Chris