> > Currently, for each command we call separate function. They in turn call
> > a unique function, thus it adds more clarity to the code. I have done
> > changes to stay in line with this standard.
>
> svn help and svn --help are not two different commands. Anyways, how do
> they add clarity to the code? I think it only adds overhead to test
> execution.
They are two different commands, but the behaviour is same. So far, we
have two different test cases for each command. Now, is your question
"why we should have two separate test cases when the behaviour is
same" ? If yes, then i guess it's a new requirement, we can take a
decision to merge two test cases as one and apply it in different patch.
If no, then we treat these two commands as different and the standard
remains same as it was so far.
> Moreover, consider the other mail I sent :
> > (run__help_test): New function. Match the defined lines and raise
> > svntest.Failure if all the lines dont match
> > (run_help_test): New function. Call run__help_test since both of
> > them does exactly the same
>
> Theres definitely no need to either have these two functions.
Currently, to run 'svn help' command, we use 'getopt_help' and
'run_help_test' functions. To run 'svn --help' command, we use
'getopt__help' and 'run__help_test' functions. Among these functions,
'getopt_help' and 'getopt__help' exist even before this patch. Let me
know how this patch can be rewritten. Thank you!
--
Regards,
Bhuvaneswaran
Received on Fri Jun 30 12:24:22 2006