Re: [PATCHv2 2/7] revision.h: introduce blob/tree walking in order of the commits

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Nov 1, 2017, 21:36 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1.1711012235070.6482@virtualbox>
In-Reply-To: <CAPc5daWpUMOCYyK=S8JiAV5DHF6BYDff8wH0N6QDeR=nvOXnLA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Junio,

On Wed, 1 Nov 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> >         ...
> >         (
> >                 for x in four three
> >                 do
> >                         git rm $x &&
> >                         git commit -m "remote $x" ||
> >                         exit
> >                 done
> >         ) &&
> >         test 0 -eq $? &&
> >         ...
> >
> > Ugly? Yes. Correct? Also yes.
> 
> I think returning non-zero with "return" is how other tests avoid an
> extra level of subshell.
> Ugly? Yes. Correct? Questionable but it seems to work for those who
> wrote them ;-)

Given that the test_expect_* functions evaluate the code, it makes me wonder whether those `return` statements really return appropriately, or one call level too low.

Ciao, Dscho