add tests for CLI usage

[marcospb19]

No description provided.

[figsoda]

Aren't we already testing most of them in the integration tests?

[marcospb19]

Maybe we do, but it didn't cover #485 case, I wrote these tests to get that case.

On top of that, our tests are property-based, it's also good to have explicit and straight-forward tests like this.

[figsoda]

yeah sounds good to me then

[marcospb19]

I don't plan on removing your property tests, they're useful and also provide us some fuzzing, but I might add some specific tests in the future (the objective is not to be redundant, but I might accidentally get redundant sometimes).

Talking about our proptests, can you tell why this run failed?

https://github.com/ouch-org/ouch/actions/runs/6113846588/job/16594167075

Mmmmm that's the bad thing about only having tests with a scope so broad, investigating can be very confusing.

[figsoda]

From the error message, it looks like the runner might have run out of memory possibly due to the fact that we are using cross and the combination of compression methods happened to take more memory than usual

[marcospb19]

From the error message, it looks like the runner might have run out of memory possibly due to the fact that we are using cross and the combination of compression methods happened to take more memory than usual

That's great to hear :D , do you suggest we do something in order to reduce the chance of getting another false-positive?

[figsoda]

Maybe trying to decrease the number of extensions, or decrease the maximum size of the file