On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Martin Furter wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Daniel Rall wrote:
> >On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Lieven Govaerts wrote:
> >>Martin Furter wrote:
> >>>If noone objects I'm going to run the full test suite and commit this
> >>>in a few days.
> >>Did someone already approve this patch?
> I thought it's an (almost) obvious fix but I don't dare to commit anything
> I'm not 120% sure it's the right thing. I'm sorry I didn't want to scare
> you :)
No problem. Lieven pointed that out because your commit access
doesn't extend to Subversion's core without approval from a full
> >Not that I'm aware of. I committed it to trunk in r23191 and r23193.
> >(I was at first unsure of the export.c change because I mis-read it a
> >couple of times, bleh.)
> Daniel, you changed my precious code! ;)
> ... which causes it to fail here:
> $ python export_tests.py 3
> Error about nonexistent URL expected
> EXCEPTION: SVNExpectedStderr
> FAIL: export_tests.py 3: attempt to export a nonexistent URL
*sigh* Sorry Martin! I somehow managed to bungle commit of your patch
Corrected on trunk, thanks for your patience.
> Another question: Why did you add curly braces around the 'return
> svn_error_createf(...)' ? I don't see anything in hacking or in the
> gnu standards document. I'm just curious if this is the preferred
> way for new code in subversion so I can do it better next time.
The braces aren't required by Subversion's coding conventions.
However, I found the code easier to read with the extra braces; the
difficulty I originally had reading the patch was caused by my eyes
and brain incorrectly assocating your "else" block with the previous
"if (! ignore_externals && recurse)" block.
Typically, when the above "if" or "else if" block uses braces, I use
braces on subsequent blocks so that things more easily match up
Received on Wed Jan 24 02:27:55 2007
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored