Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:18:48AM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote:
>
>> As suggested by Jeff King, this takes care to wrap the entire test_expect_*
>> block, but nothing else, in the verbose toggling. To that end we use
>> a new pair of hook functions. The placement is a bit weird because we
>> need to wait until the beginning of test_skip for $test_count to be
>> incremented.
[...]
> test_start ;# increment number, run setup hooks
> if ! test_skip
> then
> ...
> fi
> test_finish ;# teardown hooks
>
> Then it is a bit easier to see that each start has a finish (whereas in
> the current version, the setups in test_skip are matched by individual
> teardowns in each caller). I did not look too hard at it, though, so I
> wouldn't be surprised if there is some other hidden order dependency
> that makes that not work. :)
No, I think that's actually very reasonable. I'll do it that way in v3.
> But then what is this hunk doing:
>
>> test_eval_ () {
>> # This is a separate function because some tests use
>> # "return" to end a test_expect_success block early.
>> @@ -358,9 +399,7 @@ test_run_ () {
>>
>> if test -z "$immediate" || test $eval_ret = 0 || test -n
>> "$expecting_failure"
>> then
>> - setup_malloc_check
>> test_eval_ "$test_cleanup"
>> - teardown_malloc_check
>> fi
>> if test "$verbose" = "t" && test -n "$HARNESS_ACTIVE"
>> then
Thanks for catching this -- it's just a mis-edit that would effectively
revert 1/6.
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
