>
>
>
>If we were passing around pool parameters, you'd have the third and most
>preferrable option:
>
> * Use the pool you were passed, and let the caller decide whether
>that's a temporary subpool.
>
>I think in general, we should never assume that a function can use a
>pool stashed somewhere in a baton for temporary allocations; we should
>always pass one in. (The editor interface sometimes doesn't pass in a
>pool because it knows the stashed pool will only be usd once; I think
>that was a mistake, just in terms of consistency, but it has no
>practical problems.)
>
>
This doesn't cut to the heart of the problem for me. That is: how to
make the best decision about the potential scale of scratch usage.
Me...... now don't slap me please, I do salute the Subversion flag, for
scratch I find myself wanting to use ..... damn it .... here it comes
..... "malloc". Sorry, but I do. I will not say anything more however.
I do the subpool thing in my low level SQL classes because I didn't want
to break from the Subversion way. But I really hated to do it in places.
Please beat me up tomorrow as I have beer flowing right now. I mean it's
still Oct 31st after all:-)
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Nov 1 04:13:50 2002