From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196231F8C6 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 23:52:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231937AbhFUXyo (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:54:44 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45138 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231705AbhFUXyn (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:54:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x634.google.com (mail-pl1-x634.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::634]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31150C061574 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x634.google.com with SMTP id u2so720963plf.3 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:52:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=KJ8jzfL3xiq3rV8WHeUhFm+QFfFGhyAomxmKtW7WPIU=; b=fiqwiAniucXSoIeC2e8Me2T/cNIIY29MOgfajvZwwwKE42zetW9Dz3v/jc+azeGQHy P36iHKfc0awuJ3z03b/zv2oubBUBkT4UiglkicEuhsReGTiJvDyiClkIa+h4laiCM6pJ P12/Kt6iwvvCANSbjtkkCq4/ngQQjTwq50wsO9m+LY00uxNzma/e7WmoZufhbJyG0g+3 Lr65se9PjkiMtyj2iaSWHdqn2vikTSNFt4IEp2N7yQ8eQtGlaKNGnOBlSMiXILtsCZjX 6x9gLg/UWrJ0CB98aVlX41NkOMxQOPQ0pJqKJl0ourEfkVNNCYuwMRwD6di8v7pLLGLj 6Yzg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=KJ8jzfL3xiq3rV8WHeUhFm+QFfFGhyAomxmKtW7WPIU=; b=EDoXdfG7DW/6rNR+LIUXsenH+5FsUeqqMvP+XqdiVsrLOD2mvQLZ7+2Q1uvrz6yIED cmUTg8QHWV8OrGCcg7LEMjnZ6u7LaEp1sdgfIUhObW+aN0yd1RxpvGKPOGrXv0b2n0Mv kwxPQ+tcTJFzGgeUKNaJKMnsHt/iBNJVVLSh8N6RlYl5IQF/OD4McFLHU3XSgUjEfxik Kl5lQFQa1tw2482Al82y9EUvhlgRvgJwVgEuiZBNLXNGPZ0fX7U0+FlvriumglEG3JId gotWEqtSUb+/HGeuglxlZImuR2ohjVXKfT3u8Xm8GG7o7JYR0RX9wBkGcJ8jfYvFSYfr BqGg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531+dO0v4ATy73s+sUZzXHWlo1ltozSEGBTeHiGeofdFLZA9kY01 kN+JYgn5w/ZJe7N1ykBYaMw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyHgv8itG3kZRIbvnrqmhrKHsADd7vsBWqjaBgKY7XxcoG3vHdNYzg8S0XpoVQ2kLX8tjBMTw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8f94:b029:103:62e4:686d with SMTP id z20-20020a1709028f94b029010362e4686dmr20300605plo.42.1624319546553; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2402:800:63b8:d894:c20c:47df:f687:87d4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p6sm289636pjh.24.2021.06.21.16.52.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 06:52:23 +0700 From: =?utf-8?B?xJBvw6BuIFRy4bqnbiBDw7RuZw==?= Danh To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Eric Sunshine , Git List , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Bagas Sanjaya , Phillip Wood , Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] t: new helper test_line_count_cmd Message-ID: References: <20210615172038.28917-1-congdanhqx@gmail.com> <20210619013035.26313-1-congdanhqx@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 2021-06-19 15:50:17+0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > > > Indeed, I have no problem seeing this as a new mode of > > test_line_count() triggered by an option. In fact, I suggested exactly > > that[1] when this idea first arose (except I named the option `-c` > > rather than `-e`, but the latter is fine). However, my suggestion was > > pretty much shot down[2] (and I don't entirely disagree with [2], > > which is why I didn't pursue the idea in [1]). > > ;-) > > Yeah, I still am skeptical that we'd gain much by hiding the > redirection to >actual behind the helper, so as I said in response > to the v2 series, I am fine without this new helper or an enhanced > test_line_count, but go with more use of test_must_be_empty etc. I guess the overall feedback for this new helper is negative. I think the consensus here is a local helper in t640{0,2} for counting ls-files? -- Danh