Re: CVS update: MODIFIED: libsvn_wc ...

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> I expect to be overruled here, but: I think this is a recipe for
> spaghetti. Pools are about memory allocation, not feedback.
> Overloading them because they happen to get passed to lots of
> functions is asking for trouble.
>
> (No, I don't have a super-clever better idea.)

I think I'm in the same boat as you, Greg: feel funny about using
pools this way, but don't have a better idea. Adding an extra
argument -- no, pair of arguments, since we need a baton too -- to
just about every library function certainly seems worse.

In the absence of a super-clever better idea, hanging this stuff off
the pool is probably the best course, for sufficiently low values of
"best".

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:31 2006