chainlint.sed: drop unnecessary distinction between ?!AMP?! and ?!SEMI?!
>From inception, when chainlint.sed encountered a line using semicolon to
separate commands rather than `&&`, it would insert a ?!SEMI?!
annotation at the beginning of the line rather ?!AMP?! even though the
&&-chain is also broken by the semicolon. Given a line such as:
?!SEMI?! cmd1; cmd2 &&
the ?!SEMI?! annotation makes it easier to see what the problem is than
if the output had been:
?!AMP?! cmd1; cmd2 &&
which might confuse the test author into thinking that the linter is
broken (since the line clearly ends with `&&`).
However, now that the ?!AMP?! an ?!SEMI?! annotations are inserted at
the point of breakage rather than at the beginning of the line, and
taking into account that both represent a broken &&-chain, there is
little reason to distinguish between the two. Using ?!AMP?! alone is
sufficient to point the test author at the problem. For instance, in:
cmd1; ?!AMP?! cmd2 &&
cmd3
it is clear that the &&-chain is broken between `cmd1` and `cmd2`.
Likewise, in:
cmd1 && cmd2 ?!AMP?!
cmd3
it is clear that the &&-chain is broken between `cmd2` and `cmd3`.
Finally, in:
cmd1; ?!AMP?! cmd2 ?!AMP?!
cmd3
it is clear that the &&-chain is broken between each command.
Hence, there is no longer a good reason to make a distinction between a
broken &&-chain due to a semicolon and a broken chain due to a missing
`&&` at end-of-line. Therefore, drop the ?!SEMI?! annotation and use
?!AMP?! exclusively.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This commit is contained in:
Eric Sunshine
Junio C Hamano
parent
3865a7e36d
commit
0d7131763e
@ -24,9 +24,9 @@
|
||||
# in order to avoid misinterpreting the ")" in constructs such as "x=$(...)"
|
||||
# and "case $x in *)" as ending the subshell.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Lines missing a final "&&" are flagged with "?!AMP?!", and lines which chain
|
||||
# commands with ";" internally rather than "&&" are flagged "?!SEMI?!". A line
|
||||
# may be flagged for both violations.
|
||||
# Lines missing a final "&&" are flagged with "?!AMP?!", as are lines which
|
||||
# chain commands with ";" internally rather than "&&". A line may be flagged
|
||||
# for both violations.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Detection of a missing &&-link in a multi-line subshell is complicated by the
|
||||
# fact that the last statement before the closing ")" must not end with "&&".
|
||||
@ -47,9 +47,8 @@
|
||||
# "?!AMP?!" violation is removed from the "bar" line (retrieved from the "hold"
|
||||
# area) since the final statement of a subshell must not end with "&&". The
|
||||
# final line of a subshell may still break the &&-chain by using ";" internally
|
||||
# to chain commands together rather than "&&", so "?!SEMI?!" is not removed
|
||||
# from such a line; however, if the line ends with "?!SEMI?!", then the ";" is
|
||||
# harmless and the annotation is removed.
|
||||
# to chain commands together rather than "&&", but an internal "?!AMP?!" is
|
||||
# never removed from a line even though a line-ending "?!AMP?!" might be.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Care is taken to recognize the last _statement_ of a multi-line subshell, not
|
||||
# necessarily the last textual _line_ within the subshell, since &&-chaining
|
||||
@ -127,7 +126,7 @@ b
|
||||
# "&&" (but not ";" in a string)
|
||||
:oneline
|
||||
/;/{
|
||||
/"[^"]*;[^"]*"/!s/;/; ?!SEMI?!/
|
||||
/"[^"]*;[^"]*"/!s/;/; ?!AMP?!/
|
||||
}
|
||||
b
|
||||
|
||||
@ -231,7 +230,7 @@ s/.*\n//
|
||||
# string and not ";;" in one-liner "case...esac")
|
||||
/;/{
|
||||
/;;/!{
|
||||
/"[^"]*;[^"]*"/!s/;/; ?!SEMI?!/
|
||||
/"[^"]*;[^"]*"/!s/;/; ?!AMP?!/
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
# line ends with pipe "...|" -- valid; not missing "&&"
|
||||
@ -304,7 +303,7 @@ bcase
|
||||
# that line legitimately lacks "&&"
|
||||
:else
|
||||
x
|
||||
s/\( ?!SEMI?!\)* ?!AMP?!$//
|
||||
s/\( ?!AMP?!\)* ?!AMP?!$//
|
||||
x
|
||||
bcont
|
||||
|
||||
@ -312,7 +311,7 @@ bcont
|
||||
# "suspect" from final contained line since that line legitimately lacks "&&"
|
||||
:done
|
||||
x
|
||||
s/\( ?!SEMI?!\)* ?!AMP?!$//
|
||||
s/\( ?!AMP?!\)* ?!AMP?!$//
|
||||
x
|
||||
# is 'done' or 'fi' cuddled with ")" to close subshell?
|
||||
/done.*)/bclose
|
||||
@ -355,7 +354,7 @@ bblock
|
||||
# since that line legitimately lacks "&&" and exit subshell loop
|
||||
:clssolo
|
||||
x
|
||||
s/\( ?!SEMI?!\)* ?!AMP?!$//
|
||||
s/\( ?!AMP?!\)* ?!AMP?!$//
|
||||
p
|
||||
x
|
||||
s/^/>/
|
||||
|
||||
@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
|
||||
! (foo && bar) &&
|
||||
! (foo && bar) >baz &&
|
||||
|
||||
! (foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) &&
|
||||
! (foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) >baz
|
||||
! (foo; ?!AMP?! bar) &&
|
||||
! (foo; ?!AMP?! bar) >baz
|
||||
|
||||
@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
|
||||
(foo && bar) |
|
||||
(foo && bar) >baz &&
|
||||
|
||||
(foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) &&
|
||||
(foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) |
|
||||
(foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) >baz &&
|
||||
(foo; ?!AMP?! bar) &&
|
||||
(foo; ?!AMP?! bar) |
|
||||
(foo; ?!AMP?! bar) >baz &&
|
||||
|
||||
(foo "bar; baz")
|
||||
|
||||
@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
|
||||
(
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!SEMI?! echo bar ?!AMP?!
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!SEMI?! echo bar
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!AMP?! echo bar ?!AMP?!
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!AMP?! echo bar
|
||||
>) &&
|
||||
(
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!SEMI?! echo bar &&
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!SEMI?! echo bar
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!AMP?! echo bar &&
|
||||
cat foo ; ?!AMP?! echo bar
|
||||
>) &&
|
||||
(
|
||||
echo "foo; bar" &&
|
||||
cat foo; ?!SEMI?! echo bar
|
||||
cat foo; ?!AMP?! echo bar
|
||||
>) &&
|
||||
(
|
||||
foo;
|
||||
|
||||
@ -2,13 +2,13 @@
|
||||
(foo && bar) &&
|
||||
(foo && bar) |
|
||||
(foo && bar) >baz &&
|
||||
(foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) &&
|
||||
(foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) |
|
||||
(foo; ?!SEMI?! bar) >baz &&
|
||||
(foo; ?!AMP?! bar) &&
|
||||
(foo; ?!AMP?! bar) |
|
||||
(foo; ?!AMP?! bar) >baz &&
|
||||
(foo || exit 1) &&
|
||||
(foo || exit 1) |
|
||||
(foo || exit 1) >baz &&
|
||||
(foo && bar) ?!AMP?!
|
||||
(foo && bar; ?!SEMI?! baz) ?!AMP?!
|
||||
(foo && bar; ?!AMP?! baz) ?!AMP?!
|
||||
foobar
|
||||
>)
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user