Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] t2000: modernize overall structure and path checks

[Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7623 bytes --]

Zakariyah Ali <zakariyahali100@gmail.com> writes:

> This test script that dates back to 2005 certainly shows its age and
> both its style and the way the tests are laid out do not match the
> modern standard. Modernize it to match the current testing standards:
>
>   * Executables that prepare the data used to test the command should
>     be inside the test_expect_success block in modern tests.
>
>   * In modern tests, running a command that is being tested, making
>     sure it succeeds, and inspecting other side effects that are
>     expected, are all done in a single test_expect_success block.
>
>   * A test_expect_success block in modern tests are laid out as
>
>          test_expect_success 'title of the test' '
>                  body of the test &&
>                  ...
>                  body of the test
>          '
>
>     not as
>
>          test_expect_success \
>                  'title of the test' \
>                  'body of the test &&
>                  ...
>                  body of the test'
>
>     which is in a prehistoric style.
>
>   * In modern tests, each &&-chained statement in the body of the
>     test_expect_success block are indented with a horizontal tab,
>     unlike prehistoric style that used 4-space indent.
>
>   * Replace bare 'test -f/-d' and 'test ! -h' assertions with dedicated
>     test_path_is_* helpers (specifically test_path_is_file_not_symlink and
>     test_path_is_dir_not_symlink). While less commonly used in the test
>     suite than test_path_is_file/dir, they act as direct replacements
>     for the specific checks being performed and provide clearer
>     diagnostics on failure.
>

> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zakariyah Ali <zakariyahali100@gmail.com>
> ---
> Hi Yuchen,
>
> Thanks for the review. Regarding test_path_is_file_not_symlink and test_path_is_dir_not_symlink, I used them as direct replacements for the existing pattern: `test ! -h <path> && test -f/-d <path>`. As you noted, they are simple and straightforward. Following your suggestion, I've added a note about them to the commit message in this v4 patch.
>
> I have also added the 'Helped-by' trailer as suggested, since the commit message structure was provided by Junio C Hamano.
>
> Also, a quick question please: since the GSoC proposal period for 2026 has closed, could you guide me on the next steps for applying to subsequent related internships (like Outreachy, if applicable)? I would love to know how I can best continue contributing to Git in the meantime.
>
> Regards,
> Zakariyah Ali.
>
>  t/t2000-conflict-when-checking-files-out.sh | 99 +++++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t2000-conflict-when-checking-files-out.sh b/t/t2000-conflict-when-checking-files-out.sh
> index f18616ad2b..a8a49df93e 100755
> --- a/t/t2000-conflict-when-checking-files-out.sh
> +++ b/t/t2000-conflict-when-checking-files-out.sh
> @@ -48,17 +48,16 @@ mkdir path0
>  date >path0/file0
>  date >path1
>
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'git checkout-index without -f should fail on conflicting work tree.' \
> -    'test_must_fail git checkout-index -a'
> -
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'git checkout-index with -f should succeed.' \
> -    'git checkout-index -f -a'
> +test_expect_success 'git checkout-index without -f should fail on conflicting work tree.' '
> +	test_must_fail git checkout-index -a
> +'
>

Not on you, but generally the data setup happens in the same block as
the test, in this case we're relying on previously setup data. But this
is already better than before.

> -test_expect_success \
> -    'git checkout-index conflicting paths.' \
> -    'test -f path0 && test -d path1 && test -f path1/file1'
> +test_expect_success 'git checkout-index with -f should succeed.' '
> +	git checkout-index -f -a &&
> +	test_path_is_file path0 &&
> +	test_path_is_dir path1 &&
> +	test_path_is_file path1/file1
> +'
>

Okay we combine the two tests which were doing the execution and
validation independently.

>  test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'checkout-index -f twice with --prefix' '
>  	mkdir -p tar/get &&
> @@ -83,53 +82,63 @@ test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'checkout-index -f twice with --prefix' '
>  # path path3 is occupied by a non-directory.  With "-f" it should remove
>  # the symlink path3 and create directory path3 and file path3/file1.
>
> -mkdir path2
> -date >path2/file0
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'git update-index --add path2/file0' \
> -    'git update-index --add path2/file0'
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'writing tree out with git write-tree' \
> -    'tree1=$(git write-tree)'
> +test_expect_success 'prepare path2/file0 and index' '
> +	mkdir path2 &&
> +	date >path2/file0 &&
> +	git update-index --add path2/file0
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'write tree with path2/file0' '
> +	tree1=$(git write-tree)
> +'
> +
>  test_debug 'show_files $tree1'
>
> -mkdir path3
> -date >path3/file1
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'git update-index --add path3/file1' \
> -    'git update-index --add path3/file1'
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'writing tree out with git write-tree' \
> -    'tree2=$(git write-tree)'
> +test_expect_success 'prepare path3/file1 and index' '
> +	mkdir path3 &&
> +	date >path3/file1 &&
> +	git update-index --add path3/file1
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'write tree with path3/file1' '
> +	tree2=$(git write-tree)
> +'
> +
>  test_debug 'show_files $tree2'
>
> -rm -fr path3
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'read previously written tree and checkout.' \
> -    'git read-tree -m $tree1 && git checkout-index -f -a'
> +test_expect_success 'read previously written tree and checkout.' '
> +	rm -fr path3 &&
> +	git read-tree -m $tree1 &&
> +	git checkout-index -f -a
> +'
> +
>  test_debug 'show_files $tree1'
>
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'add a symlink' \
> -    'test_ln_s_add path2 path3'
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'writing tree out with git write-tree' \
> -    'tree3=$(git write-tree)'
> +test_expect_success 'add a symlink' '
> +	test_ln_s_add path2 path3
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'write tree with symlink path3' '
> +	tree3=$(git write-tree)
> +'
> +
>  test_debug 'show_files $tree3'
>
>  # Morten says "Got that?" here.
>  # Test begins.
>
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'read previously written tree and checkout.' \
> -    'git read-tree $tree2 && git checkout-index -f -a'
> +test_expect_success 'read previously written tree and checkout.' '
> +	git read-tree $tree2 &&
> +	git checkout-index -f -a
> +'
> +
>  test_debug 'show_files $tree2'
>
> -test_expect_success \
> -    'checking out conflicting path with -f' \
> -    'test ! -h path2 && test -d path2 &&
> -     test ! -h path3 && test -d path3 &&
> -     test ! -h path2/file0 && test -f path2/file0 &&
> -     test ! -h path3/file1 && test -f path3/file1'
> +test_expect_success 'checking out conflicting path with -f' '
> +	test_path_is_dir_not_symlink path2 &&
> +	test_path_is_dir_not_symlink path3 &&
> +	test_path_is_file_not_symlink path2/file0 &&
> +	test_path_is_file_not_symlink path3/file1
> +'
>

Shouldn't all the tests above (since 'mkdir path2') be a single test
block? First we setup the data, validate the data, the previous test
runs 'git-checkout-index' and finally here we're verifying the endstate
here. I think this should all fit into one test block.

Thanks,
Karthik

>  test_done
> --
> 2.43.0

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 690 bytes --]