From: Junio C Hamano Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 17:23:10 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] ls-files: introduce "--format" option Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <220721.86ilnqtq8f.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: >>> +test_expect_success 'git ls-files --format objectmode v.s. -s' ' >>> -+ git ls-files -s | awk "{print \$1}" >expect && >>> ++ git ls-files -s >files && >>> ++ cut -d" " -f1 files >expect && >> >> Either "awk" or "cut" is fine and flipping between them is a bit >> distracting. Cutting the pipe into two is a good move. > > That "cut" suggestion saw mine, sorry about the churn... As I said "cut" is perfectly fine. Unless this part goes away, (i.e. perhaps we may decide that it is a bad idea to check only the pieces of lines), let's not flip back to awk ;-) >> format="%(objectmode) %(objectname) %(stage) %(path)" && >> git ls-files -s >expect && >> git ls-files --format="$format" >actual && >> test_cmp expect actual >> >> I do not know if the $format I wrote without looking at the doc is >> correct, but you get the idea. > > Past rounds moved some tests towards that, maybe that's a good thing > here too I didn't look deeply this time around... OK, thanks for reviewing.