From: Aryan Pathania Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 17:34:52 GMT Subject: Re: [GSoC PATCH] t9400: prefer test_path_* helper functions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Hi Patrick, Thank you so much for taking the time out of your schedule to review my patch. >> use `test_path_*` instead of `test -[efd]` to avoid false complaints and > >Nit: We want to have full sentences in commit messages. Those sentences >should start with an upper-case letter and end with punctuation. I understand. Sorry for not knowing this. >Hm. I'm not exactly sure what "false complaints" you are talking about >here. The benefit of `test_path_*`()` over `test -[efd]` is that they >actually print information _why_ they have failed, which may help devs >to figure out what's happening. So it's kind of the opposite of what you >say in the commit message: we're now printing _more_ output, not less. I'm really sorry, I got confused in using `! test_path_*` and `test !*`. Bad mistake while writing the message. >This isn't quite equivalent: we've been checking that the path is not a >directory before, but now we verify that the path doesn't exist. I understand. I could not find `test_path_is_not_dir` or any equivalent function in `test-lib-functions.sh`. Maybe we can keep this stronger check. I'll mention in the commit message of next version of patch. >We tend to use `test_path_is_file` rather than >`test_path_is_file_not_symlink`, but I don't mind it too much. I believe `test -f` is equivalent to `test_path_is_file_not_symlink` and is a stronger check so maybe it's fine. I'll make the required changes in a new patch version. Sorry for the trouble and mistakes.