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

Re: [PATCH] add --limit argument to svn log

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2004-09-25 06:55:35 CEST

The biggest problem I see:

- SVN_ERR(svn_ra_svn_write_tuple(conn, pool, "!)(?r)(?r)bb)", start, end,
+ SVN_ERR(svn_ra_svn_write_tuple(conn, pool, "!)(?r)(?r)bbr)", start, end,

I know I left a little gap in the ra_svn infrastructure by not allowing
'n's in the optional part of a tuple, but you don't get to gloss over
that by pretending that your limit argument is a revision. That's a big
giant -1.

I suggest introducing SVN_RA_SVN_UNSPECIFIED_NUMBER, #defined to
~((unsigned apr_uint64_t) 0), and using that as the distinguished value
for an unspecified optional number.

Other issues:

In libsvn_repos/log.c, I would add a counter to the for loop rather than
adjusting start or end. It's more straightforward, and I'm a little
concerned about the correctness of your code in light of the continue
clause in the loop body. Since the loop conditions are already
complicated, the counter check might be best written as an "if (++count
>= limit) break;" (or whatever) in the loop body, after the continue
clause has been given a chance to fire.

I think the limit argument should just be an int, not a "long int". Our
code base only very rarely uses the "long" type. The only real
difference between "int" and "long" is that long is guaranteed to be 32
bits, and if ints are 16 bits (you have to go back pretty far to find an
environment like that), we're already very sunk.

In three places you wrote "compatability", which is a misspelling of

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Sep 25 06:55:59 2004

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.