Jeff King wrote:
> The "seq" tool has a "-f" option to produce printf-style formatted
> lines. Let's teach our test_seq helper the same trick. This lets us get
> rid of some shell loops in test snippets (which are particularly verbose
> in our test suite because we have to "|| return 1" to keep the &&-chain
> going).
This is a nice improvement.
> diff --git a/t/test-lib-functions.sh b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> index bee4a2ca34..8c176f4efc 100644
> --- a/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> +++ b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> @@ -1454,6 +1454,13 @@ test_cmp_fspath () {
> # from 1.
>
> test_seq () {
> + local fmt="%d"
> + case "$1" in
> + -f)
> + fmt="$2"
> + shift 2
> + ;;
> + esac
> case $# in
> 1) set 1 "$@" ;;
> 2) ;;
> @@ -1462,7 +1469,7 @@ test_seq () {
> test_seq_counter__=$1
> while test "$test_seq_counter__" -le "$2"
> do
> - echo "$test_seq_counter__"
> + printf "$fmt\n" "$test_seq_counter__"
> test_seq_counter__=$(( $test_seq_counter__ + 1 ))
> done
> }
Is it a sharp edge worth caring about that someone might
write `test_seq -f 1 5` where we'd pass 1 as the format
string?
If so, perhaps a check like this might be sufficient to
catch it early?
diff --git i/t/test-lib-functions.sh w/t/test-lib-functions.sh
index 8c176f4efc..87b59d5895 100644
--- i/t/test-lib-functions.sh
+++ w/t/test-lib-functions.sh
@@ -1458,6 +1458,10 @@ test_seq () {
case "$1" in
-f)
fmt="$2"
+ case "$fmt" in
+ *%*) : ;;
+ *) BUG "no % in -f argument" ;;
+ esac
shift 2
;;
esac
I don't know whether it's worth the extra code or not. I
just wondered about how it would fail in the face of a minor
typo. It certainly should cause any test to fail if it were
to output 1 instead of the intended format string, so it's
arguably fine as-is.
Adding -f to the usage note above, as Justin suggested might
help folks avoid making the mistake of cuddling the format
string against -f, e.g.: -f%d. That is caught by the
parameter count check (though perhaps not everyone would
notice why, thinking they did pass an argument to -f).
--
Todd
