Re: Some redundant tests in locking code?

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2005, at 11:44 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>> neither SVN_ERR_FS_BAD_LOCK_TOKEN nor
>> SVN_ERR_FS_LOCK_OWNER_MISMATCH could be resolved just by sending more
>> tokens, so there's no point in them being in the list. And
>> SVN_ERR_FS_PATH_ALREADY_LOCKED only applies to creating new locks, not
>> using them.
>
> Ah, you're correct, thanks for noticing. This can definitely be
> tightened up. Can you change it to look only for the errors that will
> actually happen?

Thanks. I could certainly produce a patch that removes the three lines I
mention above, but as I am only taking my first glimpse of the locking code, I
would much rather this be done by somebody familiar with it.

- Julian

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Apr 7 21:11:32 2005