From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Albinus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46351: 28.0.50; Add convenient way to bypass Eshell's own pipelining Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 19:41:38 +0100 Message-ID: <87h79ymeql.fsf@gmx.de> References: <878s812c6a.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87eehsz170.fsf@gmx.de> <874kin1z2x.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ft26etuh.fsf@gmx.de> <87tuex1yzo.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87czlkbxnh.fsf@gmx.de> <87ee601ey0.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <871r1yaz36.fsf@gmx.de> <87y245zzjq.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <83fsqdnc0o.fsf@gnu.org> <87r19xaoqe.fsf@gmx.de> <87o851zwdq.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87lf05algc.fsf@gmx.de> <87ilv9zuv4.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87fsqd9kch.fsf@gmx.de> <87y23dei2o.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87bl07910f.fsf@gmx.de> <87o847cuqb.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30884"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 46351@debbugs.gnu.org To: Sean Whitton Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 21 00:34:19 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nAgwd-0007rR-9Q for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 00:34:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36610 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nAgwc-0002Rh-AA for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 18:34:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50854) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nAcNm-0007rB-TF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 13:42:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:38039) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nAcNl-00077M-Uk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 13:42:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAcNl-0002li-UF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 13:42:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Michael Albinus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 18:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46351 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 46351-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46351.164270411010625 (code B ref 46351); Thu, 20 Jan 2022 18:42:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46351) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jan 2022 18:41:50 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59175 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAcNa-0002lJ-Ai for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 13:41:50 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:55009) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAcNY-0002l4-FX for 46351@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 13:41:49 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1642704099; bh=+1D/DPSDCrfhT+FT0wrh/lcy6nkW8e5LHlrZePHnaZ4=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Keqb4jNuZoEoN71QPw4hDMLAg/IBmq+xi66aFXIWgxzWgHeqQXBLT7CT1o0tWUN7t Ah0iDsjB0j5EMCY9HF+GANynkmE/6E8c/I87ngWLBze1M5eNN13v9fNyvjYQ2FHpOw JkvJ975JUHrDeygjXVOuDzTUvfneblLxoSMJmrgQ= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from gandalf.gmx.de ([213.220.156.132]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M9Wuq-1nG89v1IJw-005WVy; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 19:41:39 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87o847cuqb.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:54:04 -0700") X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:m1p23f0AXh+3k5VFxdim5NcWj+v8XV1yMg9NdjFX0dkxReCpBVT yauG89T87Th5JC5UZcxsR8zsuYlfpAIDhH0H8fPCgbpaLSSAAiLx4pQvEo4KEZCK0tWa+Lq 9xX0K2zgZaQt6kj8bAXo9euQ2J3pkusGK7diBF7w1zxXE+Qn+4O9YV7hKwa1s7MP6bhP54I ytWQBbzyNP57A6v0bJnQw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:wgWpUvWkFl8=:j/69nhD08blEb9to/5H4kY eKQClXC1azzxCNgAK8EIAJReCQfpv4NRBoLgpB+7pLPR9+0y86K6xDlnnSN5qhMuAGmdzrDum 3MZ89kDUnP0NiPd60IIxwHhcQWueiiPaaavh09qCZQJuMuuGsadGGZHizsnq9SwDwV0NoE6HT tAvl5b4hnb/9oaox9pfgOncX6nZQISB3mPS9PpAizVaIvPtkIJRBL532bjLwYXGP/5BSzutBo DvKnxwc9dGMjoJr9mXD6rFhDJDDyu47sTnFDu9LIv+TZ1q50uH7T7Tb6wtYTXh5twlkdvqp5H 8lUGVNUm6jm1j9KhHUdjKq6NvHrb1oYfR5FmQww/eL4AOlFqMLbzZsDOwr8QcVd1mYxJNyo29 TOjO9n3spBJRrqbCSiQUTkrLhnj0PbJx6kdflgVJRrYu0VoouoOXKON7SWr9+spSM2RAP1CJ9 UlIaN6bdLjypHZMQPhhjEEzqerj//OGhGVLsKE49wm1R3DWV2fR9Zx4ZY1jLBfNefWflMr22C L+z9rmlpqedNuPxdP3RF/njRWrUasPf5W6mQqZllolIE+zp4VXnVD7f1xLvOshL8MsKTo143q jAhD2Ab8ZH2wXUcXfv1Ytk4gLRGg5hOpEHHmbIuPOtcr2vZ9A4pAhrGGfTve7hzWDHr0TUMoU R4SnCjiFkhzW5/2AqHASDEJoh+flZS7KuGEr/wRIDUzFioMX0Gc0/0gh70eYQxYl9reXhuZH9 /fEDqzUJ9k2myKfTkJmDT1EEhE6wfJgP/7D+hniv4I9MndHMUw3/UdV4tuP9zZm/N0+mVvoB X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:224712 Archived-At: Sean Whitton writes: > Hello Michael, Hi Sean, > I could instead substitute the actual values of those variables into the > expected return values. It seems to me that would sacrifice readability > of the tests, though. Am I perhaps missing some other benefit? I understand your intentions, they are OK. However, if I understand your test cases, they check that the eshell commands are manipulated as you expect. The tests do not run the resulting command itself, checking the output. This is a little bit unfortune, because you could check that the output is indeed what you expect. And perhaps you could find some constellations, where the output is different when using either *| or |. This would be another proof that your changes work. And this would also give some guidance, where your approach has limitations (if exist). Showing also *failing* tests in one way or another is always a benefit. Your tests use only should, there is no should-not or should-error. Another benefit of testing working examples and their output is documentation. I always have trouble to understand documentation of unknown (to me) features in Emacs. I have the attitude to run the respective ert tests, and to study how the feature is applied by its developer. Often, it is more instructive than documentation, and I can steal the code. > Many thanks for the review. Best regards, Michael.