Re: Check min and max num targets in client args patch.
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > > Would it be better to simply pass the
> > > apr_getopt_t to the command and let
> > > it deal with separating the initial
> > > arguments from the target arguments?
> > My initial thought was "goodness no!" but upon further reading, I
> > changed my mind (see below).
> > Urk... that's a *really* good point. It's obvious that we need to
> > rethink this argument processing... I'm going to take a step back and
> > try and formulate (in English) exactly what we need to handle/provide
> > here, and then try and code from there. I'm thinking that a more
> > holistic approach is required here (one approach that takes into
> > account all the cases) instead of a bunch of different techniques.
> > -Fitz
> While this is bouncing around in your brain, let me toss
> just one more idea in there. It sure would be nice if
> it were possible to test argument parsing and subcommand
> option parsing without having a valid checkout on disk.
> Perhaps a special svn_echo executable could be compiled
> with a special -D flag.
> % svn_echo update -s one one/two.txt
> subcommand: update
> subcommand options: -s
> targets: one one.two.txt
> That would make writing test cases a lot easier
> since you could cover commands like "svn checkout"
> without actually checking something out.
OK. I've filed this in my list of things to do. I've actually changed
direction on the arg parsing stuff (yet again). See my next email and
let me know what you think.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:25 2006
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev