Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 09:06, Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> > Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> >> On Mar 25, 2010, at 7:06 AM, Philip Martin wrote:
> >> > OK. I've just noticed that every caller of svn_wc__db_wclock_set
> >> > passes zero for levels_to_lock, perhaps it doesn't need to be a
> >> > parameter at all.
> >> This is here strictly for backward compat. The access batons still
> >> have the notion of 'levels to lock' and we need to ensure that they
> >> still function correctly, even in the new world. 'levels to lock'
> >> should not be exposed through the wc-ng APIs at all: users either get
> >> to lock the entire tree (rooted at some subdir, of course), or none.
> > I added this note of yours in r927378.
> > Also I fixed another svn_sqlite__bindf "i" parameter type mismatch or
> > two in r927344. (Thought: Maybe we should aim to replace
> > svn_sqlite__bindf() or its "i" format with some alternative that's
> > harder to get wrong.)
> Feel free to suggest something, but bindf() is damned handy. I don't
> see moving away from that. And adding a second integer type in the
> format strings could simply increase the confusion and binding
> Note that there are svn_sqlite__bind_$TYPE() functions that can be
> used, whose prototypes automatically correct their args' width.
Yup. I agree it's handy, and I don't have a better idea. Saw the
Received on 2010-03-25 15:22:20 CET