Re: svn_pool_xxx vs apr_pool_xxx

Sander Striker <striker@apache.org> writes:

> We can safely replace all the svn_pool_xxx calls with apr_pool_xxx
> calls, minding a slight difference in API. An annoying one at that.
> The current pattern is:
>
> pool = svn_pool_create(parent_pool);
>
> While the apr pattern is:
>
> apr_pool_create(&pool, parent_pool);

Please don't. I shudder to think of all the outstanding patches and
merges-to-come (like my own fs-schema-changes one) which would
conflict all to heck with this change. Besides, I rather prefer our
current calling semantics.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Aug 15 20:28:23 2003