Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] t/perf: add fsmonitor perf test for git diff

From: Taylor Blau <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 17:43:39 -0400

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 09:35:15PM +0000, Nipunn Koorapati via GitGitGadget wrote:
> diff --git a/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh b/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh
> index 9313d4a51d..2b4803707f 100755
> --- a/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh
> +++ b/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh
> @@ -115,6 +115,13 @@ test_expect_success "setup for fsmonitor" '
>
>  	git config core.fsmonitor "$INTEGRATION_SCRIPT" &&
>  	git update-index --fsmonitor &&
> +	mkdir 1_file 10_files 100_files 1000_files 10000_files &&
> +	for i in `seq 1 10`; do touch 10_files/$i; done &&
> +	for i in `seq 1 100`; do touch 100_files/$i; done &&
> +	for i in `seq 1 1000`; do touch 1000_files/$i; done &&
> +	for i in `seq 1 10000`; do touch 10000_files/$i; done &&

I just happened to notice these while reading your range diff; git
discourages the use of seq in test, instead preferring our own
works-everywhere 'test_seq()'.

I was wondering how this slipped through since it should be checked
automatically by t/check-non-portable-shell.pl, but that is only run
from t/Makefile, not t/perf/Makefile. That probably explains how a few
raw `seq`'s made it into t/perf.

In either case, test_seq() is preferred here.

Thanks,
Taylor