On Friday, January 18, 2019 12:03:40 PM MST Junio C Hamano wrote: > It is a shame that you introduced a nicely reusable get_time() > mechanism to let external callers of show_date() specify what time > to format, instead of the returned timestamp of gettimeofday(), > but limited its usefulness to only testing "human" format output. > If somebody wants to extend "test-tool date" for other formats, they > also have to add a similar "show_date_XXX" hack for their format. > > How about doing it slightly differently? E.g. > > - Get rid of show_date_human(). > > - Keep get_time(), but have it pay attention to GIT_TEST_TIMESTAMP > environment variable, and when it is set, use that as if it is > the returned value from gettimeofday(). > > - If there are gettimeofday() calls in date.c this patch did not > touch (because they were not part of the "human-format" > codepath), adjust them to use get_time() instead. > > - Have "test-tool date" excersize show_date() directly. > I did follow the pattern set for relative (which is why I created show_date_human() to mimic show_date_relative() ) as had been suggested. I like this pattern better.
Why don't I create a second patch set after I git this one to next for relative to match your suggestion. I don't like the idea of conflating two topics. sps
