From: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 17:34:51 GMT Subject: Re: test &&-chain lint Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20150320172406.GA15172@peff.net> Jeff King writes: > Your case above is actually better spelled as test_expect_code, but > there are more complex one-off cases that I solved using a {} block. Just for the record, test_expect_code expects only one possible good exit status and it does not allow us to say "0 is OK and 1 is also OK, everything else is bad", so it is not quite appropriate there. > ... > So I dunno. I think "set -e" is kind of a dangerous lure. Yes, I think we should stay away from it. &&-chaining is simpler to see what is going on, even though it is a bit more to type. Thanks.