git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Cc: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>,
	Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
	Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Git in Outreachy December 2019?
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 13:04:48 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1909261257160.15067@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190923165828.GA27068@szeder.dev>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2681 bytes --]

Hi,

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 02:47:23PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 01:23:18PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > > Also, things like the code tracing via `-x` (which relies on Bash
> > > > functionality in order to work properly,
> > >
> > > Not really.
> >
> > To work properly. What I meant was the trick we need to play with
> > `BASH_XTRACEFD`.
>
> I'm still unsure what BASH_XTRACEFD trick you mean.  AFAICT we don't
> play any tricks with it to make '-x' work properly, and indeed '-x'
> tracing works properly even without BASH_XTRACEFD (and to achive that
> we did have to play some tricks, but not any with BASH_XTRACEFD;
> perhaps these tricks are what you meant?).

It works okay some of the time. But IIRC `-x -V` requires the
`BASH_XTRACEFD` trick.

However, I start to feel like I am distracted deliberately from my main
argument: that shell scripting is simply an awful language to implement
a highly reliable test framework. That we need to rely on Bash, at least
some of the time, is just _one_ of the many shortcomings.

> > > > and which _still_ does not work as intended if your test case
> > > > evaluates a lazy prereq that has not been evaluated before
> > >
> > > I don't see any striking differences between the trace output of a test
> > > involving a lazy prereq from Bash or dash:
> > >
> > > [...]
> >
> > The evaluation of the lazy prereq is indeed not different between Bash
> > or dash. It is nevertheless quite disruptive in the trace of a test
> > script, especially when it is evaluated for a test case that is skipped
> > explicitly via the `--run` option.
>
> But then the actual issue is the unnecessary evaluation of the prereq
> even when the test framework could know in advance that the test case
> should be skipped anyway, and the trace from it is a mere side effect,
> no?

I forgot a crucial tidbit: if you run with `-x` and a lazy prereq is
evaluated, not only is the output disruptive, the trace is also turned
off after the lazy prereq, _before_ the actual test case is run. So you
don't see any trace of the actual test case.

In any case, I really do not want to see this thread derailed into
specifics of Bashisms and bugs in our test framework.

My main point should not be diluted: a test framework should be
implemented in a language that offers speedy execution of even
complicated logic, proper error checking, and higher data types (i.e.
other than "everything is a string"). Unix shell script is not it.

Ciao,
Dscho

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-26 11:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-27  5:17 Jeff King
2019-08-31  7:58 ` Christian Couder
2019-08-31 19:44   ` Olga Telezhnaya
2019-09-04 19:41 ` Jeff King
2019-09-05  7:24   ` Christian Couder
2019-09-05 19:39   ` Emily Shaffer
2019-09-06 11:55     ` Carlo Arenas
2019-09-07  6:39       ` Jeff King
2019-09-07 10:13         ` Carlo Arenas
2019-09-07  6:36     ` Jeff King
2019-09-08 14:56   ` Pratyush Yadav
2019-09-09 17:00     ` Jeff King
2019-09-23 18:07   ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-26  9:47     ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-26 19:32       ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-26 21:54         ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-26 11:42     ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-13 20:03 ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-13 20:51   ` Jeff King
2019-09-16 18:42     ` Emily Shaffer
2019-09-16 21:33       ` Eric Wong
2019-09-16 21:44       ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-16 23:13         ` Jonathan Nieder
2019-09-17  0:59           ` Jeff King
2019-09-17 11:23       ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-17 12:02         ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-23 12:47           ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-23 16:58             ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-26 11:04               ` Johannes Schindelin [this message]
2019-09-26 13:28                 ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-26 19:39                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-26 21:44                     ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-27 22:18                       ` Jeff King
2019-10-09 17:25                         ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-10-11  6:34                           ` Jeff King
2019-09-23 18:19             ` Jeff King
2019-09-24 14:30               ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-17 15:10         ` Christian Couder
2019-09-23 12:50           ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-23 19:30           ` Jeff King
2019-09-23 18:07         ` Jeff King
2019-09-24 14:25           ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-24 15:33             ` Jeff King
2019-09-28  3:56               ` Junio C Hamano
2019-09-24  0:55         ` Eric Wong
2019-09-26 12:45           ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-09-30  8:55             ` Eric Wong
2019-09-28  4:01           ` Junio C Hamano
2019-09-20 17:04     ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-21  1:47       ` Emily Shaffer
2019-09-23 14:23         ` Christian Couder
2019-09-23 19:40         ` Jeff King
2019-09-23 22:29           ` Philip Oakley
2019-10-22 21:16         ` Emily Shaffer
2019-09-23 11:49       ` Christian Couder
2019-09-23 17:58         ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-23 19:27           ` Jeff King
2019-09-23 20:48             ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-23 19:15       ` Jeff King
2019-09-23 20:38         ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-23 21:28           ` Jeff King
2019-09-24 17:07             ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-26  7:09               ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1909261257160.15067@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet \
    --to=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=emilyshaffer@google.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
    --subject='Re: Git in Outreachy December 2019?' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).