RE: Cancelling Subversion operations

> Bill has raised a valid point, a single callback/baton is OK as a
> simple async-signal handling mechanism, but as a general cancellation
> mechanism it's a poor solution.

It seems that any threaded implementation can just use thread-local
storage of one for or another for its per-running-operation needs.
Thus I think the interface as specified is sufficiently powerful.
This is assuming that the same THREAD will only run one SVN operation
at a time, which seems reasonable.

The logical extension if you wanted more expressive power is for SVN
to use thread-local storage to store the user context, but that seems
rather more effort than it's worth.

Cheers,

                                / h+

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 18 23:32:34 2002