The chainlint tests are a series of individual files, each holding a
test body. The "make check-chainlint" target assembles them into a
single file, adding a "test_expect_success" function call around each.
Let's instead include that function call in the files themselves. This
is a little more boilerplate, but has several advantages:
1. You can now run chainlint manually on snippets with just "perl
chainlint.perl chainlint/foo.test". This can make developing and
debugging a little easier.
2. Many of the tests implicitly relied on the syntax of the lines
added by the Makefile (in particular the use of single-quotes).
This assumption is much easier to see when the single-quotes are
alongside the test body.
3. We had no way to test how the chainlint program handled
various test_expect_success lines themselves. Now we'll be able to
check variations.
The change to the .test files was done mechanically, using the same
test names they would have been assigned by the Makefile (this is
important to match the expected output). The Makefile has the minimal
change to drop the extra lines; there are more cleanups possible but a
future patch in this series will rewrite this substantially anyway.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The chainlint self-test code snippets are supposed to represent the body
of a test_expect_success() or test_expect_failure(), yet the contents of
a few tests would have caused the shell to report syntax errors had they
been real test bodies due to the mix of single- and double-quotes.
Although chainlint.sed, with its simplistic heuristics, is blind to this
problem, a future more robust chainlint implementation might not have
such a limitation. Therefore, stop mixing quote types haphazardly in
those tests and unify quoting throughout. While at it, drop chunks of
tests which merely repeat what is already tested elsewhere but with
alternative quotes.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This extract from contrib/subtree/t7900 triggered a false positive due
to three chainlint limitations:
* recognizing only a "blessed" set of here-doc tag names in a subshell
("EOF", "EOT", "INPUT_END"), of which "TXT" is not a member
* inability to recognize multi-line $(...) when the first statement of
the body is cuddled with the opening "$("
* inability to recognize multiple constructs on a single line, such as
opening a multi-line $(...) and starting a here-doc
Now that all of these shortcomings have been addressed, turn this rather
pathological bit of shell coding into a chainlint test case.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
