git-commit-vandalism/t/chainlint/here-doc-multi-line-string.expect

(
	cat && echo "multi-line	string" ?!AMP?!
	bap
)
chainlint: let here-doc and multi-line string commence on same line After swallowing a here-doc, chainlint.sed assumes that no other processing needs to be done on the line aside from checking for &&-chain breakage; likewise, after folding a multi-line quoted string. However, it's conceivable (even if unlikely in practice) that both a here-doc and a multi-line quoted string might commence on the same line: cat <<\EOF && echo "foo bar" data EOF Support this case by sending the line (after swallowing and folding) through the normal processing sequence rather than jumping directly to the check for broken &&-chain. This change also allows other somewhat pathological cases to be handled, such as closing a subshell on the same line starting a here-doc: ( cat <<-\INPUT) data INPUT or, for instance, opening a multi-line $(...) expression on the same line starting a here-doc: x=$(cat <<-\END && data END echo "x") among others. Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 2018-08-13 10:47:37 +02:00			`(`
chainlint.sed: improve ?!AMP?! placement accuracy When chainlint.sed detects a broken &&-chain, it places an ?!AMP?! annotation at the beginning of the line. However, this is an unusual location for programmers accustomed to error messages (from compilers, for instance) indicating the exact point of the problem. Therefore, relocate the ?!AMP?! annotation to the end of the line in order to better direct the programmer's attention to the source of the problem. Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 2021-12-13 07:30:50 +01:00			`cat && echo "multi-line string" ?!AMP?!`
chainlint: let here-doc and multi-line string commence on same line After swallowing a here-doc, chainlint.sed assumes that no other processing needs to be done on the line aside from checking for &&-chain breakage; likewise, after folding a multi-line quoted string. However, it's conceivable (even if unlikely in practice) that both a here-doc and a multi-line quoted string might commence on the same line: cat <<\EOF && echo "foo bar" data EOF Support this case by sending the line (after swallowing and folding) through the normal processing sequence rather than jumping directly to the check for broken &&-chain. This change also allows other somewhat pathological cases to be handled, such as closing a subshell on the same line starting a here-doc: ( cat <<-\INPUT) data INPUT or, for instance, opening a multi-line $(...) expression on the same line starting a here-doc: x=$(cat <<-\END && data END echo "x") among others. Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 2018-08-13 10:47:37 +02:00			`bap`
chainlint.sed: drop subshell-closing ">" annotation chainlint.sed inserts a ">" annotation at the beginning of a line to signal that its heuristics have identified an end-of-subshell. This was useful as a debugging aid during development of the script, but it has no value to test writers and might even confuse them into thinking that the linter is misbehaving by inserting line-noise into the shell code it is validating. Moreover, its presence also potentially makes it difficult to reuse the chainlint self-test "expect" output should a more capable linter ever be developed. Therefore, drop the ">" annotation. Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 2021-12-13 07:30:54 +01:00			`)`