Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2024, #02; Thu, 7)

[Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>]

On 08/03/2024 15:42, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On 08/03/2024 02:26, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> * rs/t-ctype-simplify (2024-03-03) 4 commits
>>>     (merged to 'next' on 2024-03-04 at 9bd84a8877)
>>>    + t-ctype: avoid duplicating class names
>>>    + t-ctype: align output of i
>>>    + t-ctype: simplify EOF check
>>>    + t-ctype: allow NUL anywhere in the specification string
>>>    Code simplification to one unit-test program.
>>>    Will merge to 'master'.
>>>    source: <20240303101330.20187-1-l.s.r@web.de>
>>
>> I have some concerns about the last patch of this series
>> c.f. <0947cb09-8b07-4fcd-bbe2-ae37c2cd5ec7@gmail.com> It might be too
>> late for this series but using the internal implementation functions
>> rather than TEST() is not a pattern that I would want us to encourage.
> 
> I actually think it is merely showing the lack of necessary features
> in TEST() and other public macros/functions of the relatively new
> low level test framework.  If a user of the framework needs to use
> the "internal implementation functions", that gives an incentive to
> those who are pushing for the test framework to polish and update it,
> so that such a framework client does not have to go deep into the
> implementation details.  When they come up with an improved framework,
> they naturally have the first target to adjust to the framework to
> demonstrate that they made the world a better place ;-)

I think that's fair - I'll flesh out the details of a couple of helper 
macros TEST_BEGIN and TEST_END for tests like this in consultation with 
René in the other thread.

I do hope though that unit test authors will feel free to improve the 
framework themselves if they find it lacking as a contributor writing an 
integration test would do with the integration test framework. As we get 
more experience with unit tests were bound to want more helper functions.

> And I think such an update can come after the dust settles in this
> case.  It is just a single simple test that is isolated and nobody
> other than the unit-test folks should care about, as the subject of
> test has not seen any change for a long time.

Agreed

Best Wishes

Phillip