On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 at 00:56, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Moumita <dhar61595@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > + ## t/t4018/bash-bashism-style-multiline-function (new) ##
> > +@@
> > ++function RIGHT \
> > ++{
> > ++ echo 'ChangeMe'
> > ++}
> > + \ No newline at end of file
> > +
> > + ## t/t4018/bash-posix-style-multiline-function (new) ##
> > +@@
> > ++RIGHT() \
> > ++{
> > ++ ChangeMe
> > ++}
> > + \ No newline at end of file
>
> For these new test, is it essential that these sample files end in
> incomplete lines? In other words, are these tests trying to make
> sure that the function line is correctly found even if the function
> body is at the end of the file that lack the final terminating LF?
>No , the skipping of newline at the end of the test files is not intended.The tests are only meant to check multiline function detection, ensuring that a function body starting on the next line after a line continuation \ is correctly recognized.
> If that is what they are testing, please add comments near the
> beginning of the file to tell future developers that it is essential
> that they keep these files end in incomplete lines and why.
>
> If that is not what these tests are checking, then make these lines
> complete lines instead, as they waste future developers' time making
> them wonder if there are valid reasons why these files must end in
> incomplete lines.
> Yes I will do that and send the patch again . Thank you for the feedback.
