[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r1079400 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py

From: Paul Burba <ptburba_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 09:38:31 -0400

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> pburba_at_apache.org wrote on Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 15:46:10 -0000:
>> Author: pburba
>> Date: Tue Mar  8 15:46:09 2011
>> New Revision: 1079400
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1079400&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Follow-up to rr1076726, fix a flawed log -g test helper.
>>
>> * subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>>   (check_merge_results): Account for the fact that the EXPECTED_MERGES arg
>>    might be None.  Fix the check of expected merges so it doesn't spuriously
>>    pass when EXPECTED_REVSERSE_MERGES is none.
>>
>
> EXPECTED_REVERSE_MERGES
>
>> Suggested by: danielsh
>>
>> Modified:
>>     subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>>
>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py?rev=1079400&r1=1079399&r2=1079400&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py (original)
>> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py Tue Mar  8 15:46:09 2011
>> @@ -1148,9 +1148,9 @@ def check_merge_results(log_chain, expec
>>
>>    # Check to see if the number and values of the revisions is correct
>>    for log in log_chain:
>> -    if (log['revision'] not in expected_merges
>> -        and (expected_reverse_merges is not None
>> -             and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges)):
>> +    if not ((expected_merges and log['revision'] in expected_merges)
>> +            or (expected_reverse_merges
>> +                and log['revision'] in expected_reverse_merges)):
>
> If EXPECTED_MERGES and EXPECTED_REVERSE_MERGES are both None,
> then the if() would trigger --- and I don't think that's the
> intention.

Hi Daniel,

It is the intention. If EXPECTED_MERGES and EXPECTED_REVERSE_MERGES
are both None, then the caller believes that no merged revisions
(normal or reverse) are present. However, there *is* something in the
LOG_CHAIN, so there is an error. Admittedly, none of the present
callers pass EXPECTED_MERGES=None and EXPECTED_REVERSE_MERGES=None,
but we might have reason to do so in the future.

Paul

>>        raise SVNUnexpectedLogs("Found unexpected revision %d" %
>>                                log['revision'], log_chain)
>>
>>
>
Received on 2011-03-15 14:39:46 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.