From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 22:10:14 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] t8002: fix ambiguous printf conversion specifications
Message-ID: <xmqqplkfyg1l.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <20250120114106.2844157-1-jpalus@fastmail.com>

Jan Palus <jpalus@fastmail.com> writes:

> -	$(printf "%0.s " $(test_seq 11)) (<author@example.com> 2005-04-07 15:45:13 -0700 1) abbrev
> +	$(printf "%11s" "") (<author@example.com> 2005-04-07 15:45:13 -0700 1) abbrev

This obviously is much clearer than the obscure original that
concatenates " " 11 times (for 11 arguments that printf receives).

Nice.

> @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ test_expect_success 'blame --abbrev -b truncates the blank boundary' '
>  
>  test_expect_success 'blame with excessive --abbrev and -b culls to hash length' '
>  	cat >expect <<-EOF &&
> -	$(printf "%0.s " $(test_seq $hexsz)) (<author@example.com> 2005-04-07 15:45:13 -0700 1) abbrev
> +	$(printf "%${hexsz}s" "") (<author@example.com> 2005-04-07 15:45:13 -0700 1) abbrev

The fact that $hexsz was not quoted in the original made me look at
how it is defined (as an unquoted variable reference is often a way
to lose unwanted leading whitespaces, e.g. bytes=$(wc -c <foo) &&
show $bytes), but it seems that hexsz would not get any leading (or
trailing) whitespaces so this rewrite perfectly fine.

Thanks.  Will queue.