From: Jakub Narebski Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 08:25:57 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] t4018: introduce test cases for the internal hunk header patterns Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1324348939-27115-1-git-send-email-drafnel@gmail.com> Brandon Casey writes: > diff --git a/t/t4018/ignore_global.cpp b/t/t4018/ignore_global.cpp > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..95e23bc > --- /dev/null > +++ b/t/t4018/ignore_global.cpp > @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ > +int WRONG_function_hunk_header_preceding_the_right_one (void) > +{ > + return 0; > +} > + > +int RIGHT_function_hunk_header (void) > +{ > + printf("Hello, world\n"); > + return 0; > +} > + > +int WRONG_global_variable; > + > +int ChangeMe; > + > +int WRONG_function_hunk_header_following_the_right_one (void) > +{ > + return 0; > +} Shouldn't ChangeMe be inside function? > diff --git a/t/t4018/simple.cpp b/t/t4018/simple.cpp > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..c96ad87 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/t/t4018/simple.cpp > @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ > +/* > + * Test file for testing the internal hunk header patterns > + * > + * The "RIGHT" hunk header function, the one that should appear on the > + * hunk header line, should be named "RIGHT_function_hunk_header" and > + * the body of this function should have an assignment that looks like > + * > + * answer = 0 Shouldn't it be ChangeMe? > + * > + * within it, deep enough so the lines of context do not include the > + * function name. > + * > + * If the name of this file begins with "broken_", then it will be > + * interpreted as a pattern which does not work, but which should. > + */ -- Jakub Narêbski