On 3 Nov 2011, at 11:48, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 11/02/2011 05:42 PM, Barry Scott wrote:
>> I wish that the canonical stuff was inside the svn_client_XXX API calls and not
>> a burdon on callers. To my mind the svn.exe API and the svn_client_XXX should
>> accept the same strings and either operate or return an error. Avoiding the
>> asserts from using svn_client_XXX is the lions share of the work of getting
>> svn binding sane.
> Two problems with such a move:
> - libsvn_client isn't the only API called from code outside of the
> Subversion core distribution. What does to auto-canonicalization in
> libsvn_client do if passing the same uncanonical path to libsvn_wc will then
Then the logic of the suituation would be that lib_svn_wc needed to
change as well.
> - canonicalizing inside the API means the API must therefore assume that
> input paths are not canonical. That means performing the same
> canonicalization over and over again each time the API is called. That's
> wasteful. Better to ask the highest level of code to make its input conform
> once (we even offer the functions to do so!) and then take advantage of
> known-good input from then on.
From my point of view svn_client_XXX is the highest level of code I call.
I convert to canonical on every call of svn. Its saves nothing.
I think it makes using the svn API unnecessarily complex.
I'm under no illusions that this is likely to change, but I wanted to
bring this issue to your attention.
Received on 2011-11-04 10:53:42 CET