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

Re: Doc string for svn_wc_status misleading?

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: 2004-10-03 23:42:18 CEST

Arild Fines wrote:
> cmpilato@localhost.localdomain wrote:
>>"Arild Fines" <arild.fines@broadpark.no> writes:
>>>Looking at the code, there does not seem to be any way for
>>>text_status to be set to svn_wc_status_none for an ignored
>>>file. This means it is impossible to detect an ignored file using
>>>svn_wc_status alone.
>>The docstring is just out of date, I think. Here's a code comment
>>that seems to explain the state of the real world:
>> /* If this path has no entry, but IS present on disk, it's
>> unversioned. If this file is being explicitly ignored (due
>> to matching an ignore-pattern), the text_status is set to
>> svn_wc_status_ignored. Otherwise the text_status is set to
>> svn_wc_status_unversioned. */
> Yes, I saw that commment in assemble_status. However, the following block
> performs a check for the is_ignored parameter, which is always passed from
> svn_wc_status as FALSE:

So, is the doc string or that code comment (or both) actually wrong? If so, we should first fix the comment (perhaps with a note that the behaviour is not what we would really like). Then discuss fixing the API.

- Julian

> SVN_ERR (assemble_status (status, path, adm_access, entry, parent_entry,
> svn_node_unknown, TRUE, FALSE, pool));
> The last FALSE is is_ignored. That brings us back to my original point: It
> is impossible to get information about ignore status out of svn_wc_status.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Oct 3 23:49:29 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.