Re: [PATCH] t9803-git-p4-shell-metachars.sh: update to use test_path_* functions

[Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 3:48 PM Sanchit Jindal via GitGitGadget
<gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: sanchit1053 <sanchit1053@gmail.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: sanchit1053 <sanchit1053@gmail.com>

Thanks for submitting a microproject. Some comments...

The From: and Signed-off-by: lines should include your full name and
email address, so probably:

    From: Sanchit Jindal <sanchit1053@gmail.com>
    ...
    Signed-off-by: Sanchit Jindal <sanchit1053@gmail.com>

Reviewers would like to know why the changes made by the patch are
desirable, so use the space between From: and Signed-off-by: to
explain the rationale for the patch. This particular case doesn't
require much explanation, but you may want to say something about how
the `test_path_*` functions provide useful diagnostics when they fail
whereas `test` does not.

> ---
>     t9803-git-p4-shell-metachars.sh: update to use test_path_* functions
>
>     I have updated the statements test [!] -[e|f] with the corresponding
>     test_path_* functions The statements are at the end of their respective
>     texts and can be easily replaced
>
>     I am having trouble with the git send-email and my institutes firewall,
>     that is why I am trying to use gitgitgadget

This portion after the "---" line is for commentary which doesn't
become part of the official commit message (unlike the portion above
the "---" lines). When you resubmit, you can use this commentary area
to explain what you changed between v1 and v2 (which, in this case,
will just be adding a commit message and fixing the From: and
Signed-off-by: lines). GitGitGadget inserts what you wrote in the PR's
description into this area below the "---" line, so you'll want to
update the PR's description to explain what changed between v1 and v2.

> diff --git a/t/t9803-git-p4-shell-metachars.sh b/t/t9803-git-p4-shell-metachars.sh
> @@ -33,8 +33,8 @@ test_expect_success 'shell metachars in filenames' '
> -               test -e "file with spaces" &&
> -               test -e "foo\$bar"
> +               test_path_exists "file with spaces" &&
> +               test_path_exists "foo\$bar"
> @@ -52,8 +52,8 @@ test_expect_success 'deleting with shell metachars' '
> -               test ! -e "file with spaces" &&
> -               test ! -e foo\$bar
> +               test_path_is_missing "file with spaces" &&
> +               test_path_is_missing foo\$bar
> @@ -100,8 +100,8 @@ test_expect_success 'branch with shell char' '
> -               test -f shell_char_branch_file &&
> -               test -f f1
> +               test_path_is_file shell_char_branch_file &&
> +               test_path_is_file f1

These changes all look trivially correct and faithfully retain the
intention of the original `test` checks. Good.