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

Re: CVS update: MODIFIED: libsvn_wc ...

From: <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2001-06-12 19:43:24 CEST

Karl Fogel <kfogel@collab.net> writes:

> 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".

Would it make anyone feel better to realize that when the actual APR
library functions use pools, they pass them around not as "pools", but
refers to them instead as "contexts" ? In other words, just because
the primary motivation for the existence of pools is simplified memory
management, they were apparently built specifically to represent
nestable code contexts.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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

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