On Monday, February 17, 2003, at 09:40 PM, Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 20:32, Garrett Rooney wrote:
>> well, in that case, if it could potentially be a problem, we don't
>> *have* to use svn_delta_default_editor, we can just as easily declare
>> the editor structure statically in cancel.c and return a pointer to
>> it.
>> any objections to that?
>
> Although there are no immediately identifiable practical problems with
> having libsvn_subr depend on data structures in libsvn_delta, it's
> still
> a very bad practice in my mind.
>
> And as I previously said, libsvn_delta is a fine place for the
> cancellation editor to live. There's no reason to create circles in
> our
> library MDD for this feature.
i don't have any real problem with moving the code in there, other than
it being kind of odd to have something associated with 'cancelation' in
the svn_delta namespace. it just seems more natural for it to be
called svn_cancel_get_cancellation_editor than
svn_delta_get_cancellation_editor.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Feb 18 03:57:29 2003