[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Question on JavaHL change

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 18:08:11 -0400

We went a slightly different direction, see trunk.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 23, 2008, at 6:02 PM, Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com> wrote:

> Mark Phippard wrote:
>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Mark Phippard
>>> <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The LogDate idea is a good solution. Do we think we can get it
>>>> implemented in time for the release? If not, I still think we
>>>> should
>>>> just back out these changes and do this in 1.6.
>>> I have attached a patch which adds a LogDate class and uses it in
>>> SVNClient. The C++ would need to be changed to store a LogDate
>>> object
>>> in the Map for the svn:date entry.
>> Attaching a second patch. This adds a test case for the LogDate
>> class. This patch just includes the test.
>
>
> The LogDate looks good. A couple of comments.
>
> Does JDK < 1.5 support annotations?
>
> I think getDate should be synchronized.
>
> In this code
>
> + LogDate date = (LogDate) revprops.get("svn:date");
> + if (date == null) date = new LogDate(0);
>
> That assumes revprops will return a LogDate for the svn:date
> property? And people have to cast it? Seems clumsy. I like a
> stronger interface where people don't have to do casts when possible.
>
> Blair

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-05-24 00:10:04 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.