[codex] support multiline command blocks#5
Conversation
|
Claude encountered an error —— View job I'll analyze this and get back to you. |
|
I recommend closing this design in favor of #6. The auto-detect approach is elegant and shell-like, but it makes the transcript parser depend on shell completeness. That means whether a line is a transcript opcode depends on prior shell syntax, error behavior depends on mvdan/sh parser details, and future transcript syntax changes become riskier because raw command bodies can silently absorb lines. For a snapshot-test format, the explicit continuation opcode in #6 is easier to read and review. It keeps .cmdt visibly line-oriented: command input lines are marked as command input, while assertions stay assertions. |
|
Closing in favor of #6, which uses explicit command continuation lines. |
Summary
Validation