e44f15ba3e
The annotations emitted by chainlint to indicate detected problems are overly terse, so much so that developers new to the project -- those who should most benefit from the linting -- may find them baffling. For instance, although the author of chainlint and seasoned Git developers may understand that "?!AMP?!" is an abbreviation of "ampersand" and indicates a break in the &&-chain, this may not be obvious to newcomers. The "?!LOOP?!" case is particularly serious because that terse single word does nothing to convey that the loop body should end with "|| return 1" (or "|| exit 1" in a subshell) to ensure that a failing command in the body aborts the loop immediately. Moreover, unlike &&-chaining which is ubiquitous in Git tests, the "|| return 1" idiom is relatively infrequent, thus may be harder for a newcomer to discover by consulting nearby code. Address these shortcomings by emitting human-readable messages which both explain the problem and give a strong hint about how to correct it. Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
32 lines
661 B
Plaintext
32 lines
661 B
Plaintext
2 for i in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
3 do
|
|
4 for j in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
5 do
|
|
6 echo "$i$j" >"path$i$j" ?!LINT: missing '|| return 1'?!
|
|
7 done ?!LINT: missing '|| return 1'?!
|
|
8 done &&
|
|
9
|
|
10 for i in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
11 do
|
|
12 for j in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
13 do
|
|
14 echo "$i$j" >"path$i$j" || return 1
|
|
15 done
|
|
16 done &&
|
|
17
|
|
18 for i in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
19 do
|
|
20 for j in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
21 do
|
|
22 echo "$i$j" >"path$i$j" ?!LINT: missing '|| return 1'?!
|
|
23 done || return 1
|
|
24 done &&
|
|
25
|
|
26 for i in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
27 do
|
|
28 for j in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9;
|
|
29 do
|
|
30 echo "$i$j" >"path$i$j" || return 1
|
|
31 done || return 1
|
|
32 done
|