Re: [PATCH] connect: also update offset for features without values

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sep 19, 2021, 02:20 UTC
Message-ID: <YUaeUuX7aoXtS3jQ@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cSSxgVU47wCNpcW2HTwCA60e1oZ6Yzkb5i-W2HDijq+MQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 09:02:37PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 6:05 PM Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> > Swapping out the "printf >expect" for a here-doc might make it a bit
> > more readable. I used printf because of the tab handling, but:
> >
> >   tab=$(printf "\t")
> >   cat >expect <<-EOF
> >   ref: ${dst}${tab}HEAD
> >   ${oid}${tab}HEAD
> >   EOF
> >
> > isn't too bad.
> 
> Or just use q_to_tab():
> 
>     q_to_tab >expect <<-EOF
>     ref: ${dst}QHEAD
>     ${oid}QHEAD
>     EOF
> 
> However, the typical use-case for q_to_tab() is when we need a leading
> or trailing TAB character.

Ah, yeah, I forgot we had that. I _thought_ we had a variable ($HT or something) for this, but it looks like we only define and use it in a few scripts.

I'm not sure using q_to_tab() is all that readable here, because it blends into the HEAD token.

> When TAB is embedded within the line, we
> often just use a literal TAB character; indeed, many tests in the
> suite do exactly that, so that would be an even simpler option.

Yeah, that'd probably be OK. I usually shy away from embedded tabs because they can cause confusion in editors. But we have them already, and this kind of expected output is not touched all that often.

-Peff