On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:28 PM Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:05 PM Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote:
> > The 'expect'ed outcome is taken by running the 'range-diff |decode';
> > it is not meant as guidance, rather as a documentation of the current
> > situation.
>
> I'm not really sure what this is trying to say. It seems _too_ brief.
>
> Did you want a space after the vertical bar before "decode"?
I am trying to say that this patch was generated by inserting
a "true && test_pause" first and then inside that paused test,
I just run
source <path>/t/test-lib-functions.sh
git range-diff changed...changed-message --color --dual-color \
| test_decode_color
and saved that as the expected outcome, I was prepared to
massage it gently by s/<TAB>/Q/ but that was not needed,
but I forgot the q_to_tab in place.
By adding the test this way, I just want to state "I observed
the functionality as produced in this patch". I do not want
to endorse the coloring scheme or claim it is good (it is,
but I also still have nits to pick). So I tried to briefly say
that the test is essentially "autogenerated" by just observing
output at that point in time.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/t/t3206-range-diff.sh b/t/t3206-range-diff.sh
> > +test_expect_success 'simple coloring' '
> > + q_to_tab >expect <<-EOF &&
>
> Why 'q_to_tab'? I don't see any "q"'s in the body.
>
> I also don't see any variable interpolation in the body, so maybe you
> want -\EOF instead?
All good suggestions! Thanks for the review, I'll incorporate them.
Thanks,
Stefan
