Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/t/t6010-merge-base.sh b/t/t6010-merge-base.sh
>>>> index f80bba8..3a1abee 100755
>>>> --- a/t/t6010-merge-base.sh
>>>> +++ b/t/t6010-merge-base.sh
>>>> @@ -230,4 +230,31 @@ test_expect_success 'criss-cross merge-base for
>>>> octopus-step' '
>>>> test_cmp expected.sorted actual.sorted
>>>> '
>>>>
>>>> +test_expect_success 'using reflog to find the fork point' '
>>>> + git reset --hard &&
>>>> + git checkout -b base $E &&
>>>> + (
>>>> + for count in 1 2 3 4 5
>>>> + do
>>>> + git commit --allow-empty -m "Base commit #$count"
>>>> &&
>>>> + git rev-parse HEAD >expect$count &&
>>>> + git checkout -B derived &&
>>>> + git commit --allow-empty -m "Derived #$count" &&
>>>> + git rev-parse HEAD >derived$count &&
>>>> + git checkout base &&
>>>> + count=$(( $count + 1 )) || exit 1
>>>> + done
>>>
>>> Did you want && here?
>>
>> No, I did not. Can't you tell from the fact that I didn't put one
>> there ;-)?
>>
>> It does not hurt to have one there, but it is not necessary.
>>
>> Because the loop itself does not &&-cascade from anything else, the
>> only case anything after "done &&" would be skipped and making the
>> whole thing fail would be when anything inside the loop fails, but
>> we already "exit 1" to terminate the whole subprocess in that case,
>> so we will not continue past the loop.
>
> I didn't read inside the loop closely enough to see that. Sorry
> for the noise.
Heh, you helped me realize that the above was suboptimal, and it
wasn't a noise ;-)
We could do it this way without the subshell and the exit, I would
think.
test_expect_success 'using reflog to find the fork point' '
git reset --hard &&
git checkout -b base $E &&
for count in 1 2 3 4 5
do
git commit --allow-empty -m "Base commit #$count" &&
git rev-parse HEAD >expect$count &&
git checkout -B derived &&
git commit --allow-empty -m "Derived #$count" &&
git rev-parse HEAD >derived$count &&
git checkout base &&
count=$(( $count + 1 )) || break
done &&
for count in 1 2 3 4 5
do
git merge-base --reflog base $(cat derived$count) >actual &&
test_cmp expect$count actual || break
done &&
# check defaulting to HEAD
git merge-base --reflog base >actual &&
test_cmp expect5 actual
'
To the earlier code, somebody could add
(
+ more setup code &&
+ yet more setup code &&
for count in 1 2 3 4 5
inside the subshell and we would fail to notice fairlure from the
new setup code if we didn't have && after the first "done". There
is much less risk of that kind of breakage if we did the loop
without subshell and exit and instead with the usual &&-cascade.
Thanks.
--
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
