On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 01:46, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>
> > VK Sameer <sameer@collab.net> writes:
> >
> > > + * First check whether all characters are valid in UTF8
> > > + * Next check whether all characters are non-control characters
> > > + * Currently, all other paths are allowed.
> >
> > Hrm... this is somewhere between "leaking the details of the
> > implmentation" and "actually useful information". I think it's the
> > "first...next..." that's bugging me.
> >
> Just documenting what's a valid path would be better.
OK, will do.
> > > +svn_error_t *svn_path_is_valid_in_svn (const char *path,
> > > + apr_size_t len,
> > > + apr_pool_t *pool);
>
> To me, this name sounds like a question that returns a boolean. Would
> replacing is with ensure make sense?
How about verify instead? Ensure seems to have connotations of modifying
the path if it's not valid.
Thanks
Sameer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Dec 7 03:15:31 2004