Hi Peff,

On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Jeff King wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 03:04:36AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > So far, we had no explicit tests of that function.
> 
> Makes sense. The pager tests fixed in an earlier commit were effectively
> checking those, but I don't mind making it explicit.

Well, TBH I am a bit uncomfortable with t7006 doing those tests. Just
imagine that something breaks in that script, say, when working on
exporting the read_early_config() function. You probably see this coming:
debugging those breakages is half a nightmare. There are multiple levels
of shell script functions, a Perl script, and an isatty() call between the
bug hunter and the bug.

With the new tests, it all becomes much more straight-forward to debug.
And also less surprising (think about the fun you can have with test cases
that fail when running `make t7006-pager.sh` but not when running `bash
t7006-pager.sh -i -v -x`, just because of a forgotten `test_terminal`...).

And yes, you can debug t7006 with the good old "insert debug print
statements here and there, then compile and run, rinse & repeat" method.
But you know, getting to use a real IDE with real debugger/intellisense
integration after years of working on C code in the terminal with vim and
gdb [*1*], I kinda feel a bit pampered and ask myself how I could possibly
have put up with the awkwardness. ;-)

Ciao,
Dscho

Footnote *1*: for some years I developed Java code in Eclipse and already
then did I notice just how much faster development becomes when you have
powerful tools to help you...

Reply via email to