Re: svn commit: r16652 - trunk/subversion/include

Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> writes:
> If this has a public-style name because SWIG requires it, the comment
> should say so, otherwise a future programmer will likely change it to
> a private name.

I don't think the new type needs to be private. The point of the
comment is just to explain why things weren't done in the more
intuitive way, that is, with an inline anonymous type. No need to
give readers of the code an unnecessary scratch-head-and-think moment,
when a simple comment can explain what's going on.

I've done this in r16655.

Now for another question:

Why is it not 'svn_opt_revision_value_t'? I thought we always used _t
for types that are unaccompanied by some other type-indicating keyword
(e.g., 'struct' or 'enum'). We should settle this now, since this is
going into 1.3.

-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 11 22:22:31 2005