Three of the five review findings land here; the other two are recorded
as named deferrals in the framing on the dired branch.
Finding 1: the command comment cited "acc4", a name from a draft scheme
that no test carries. It now names the real test, and the comment splits
the shadowing consequence into the two cases that actually exist -- a new
bare name that matches an entry (shadowed) versus one that matches
nothing (creates normally) -- each pointing at its test.
Finding 2: the everyday new-file flow had no test. Typing a bare name
that is not a subsequence of any entry is the path users hit first, and
the only route combining free text with a relative join; every existing
new-file test used a name containing a separator.
find_file_bare_new_name_creates_in_the_root covers it, asserting the
parent is the prompt's root so the join itself is pinned.
Finding 3: the failure arm was never exercised, and as the review noted,
deleting the pcall would have passed the whole suite. Accepting a
directory candidate reaches display_file, whose load fails because
File::open on a directory succeeds and the read returns EISDIR;
find_file_accepting_a_directory_reports_instead_of_raising pins that this
surfaces as the command's status message, leaves the active buffer alone,
and closes the prompt. Verified by manual revert: with the pcall replaced
by a direct call, that test and only that test fails. scripts/bite could
not isolate it, since the guard and its test have no separating commit.
Finding 4 is documented at the command rather than left implicit:
accepting on empty input opens the first-sorted candidate, because
fuzzy_score returns Some(0) for an empty needle and filter_and_sort
breaks the tie lexicographically, so dotfiles lead and a directory can
lead. M-x and switch-buffer share the mechanism, so it is inherited
rather than introduced, and it is listed in the framing beside the
accept-semantics change that would close it.
Levi Neuwirth
0b0d5acd81