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

Re: libsvn_wc/status.c:assemble_status() doc string lies?

From: Philip Martin <philip_at_codematters.co.uk>
Date: 2005-10-04 22:51:21 CEST

kfogel@collab.net writes:

> Daniel Rall <dlr@finemaltcoding.com> writes:
>> --- status.c (revision 16464)
>> +++ status.c (working copy)
>> @@ -190,11 +190,10 @@
>>
>> ENTRY may be null, for non-versioned entities. In this case, we
>> will assemble a special status structure item which implies a
>> - non-versioned thing.
>> + non-versioned thing. As non-null ENTRY will be deep copied (as
>> + opposed to stored directly), and the lifetime its pool is not
>> + important.
>>
>> - Else, ENTRY's pool must not be shorter-lived than STATUS's, since
>> - ENTRY will be stored directly, not copied.
>> -
>> PARENT_ENTRY is the entry for the parent directory of PATH, it may be
>> NULL if ENTRY is NULL or if PATH is a working copy root. The lifetime
>> of PARENT_ENTRY's pool is not important.
>
> A bit verbose, maybe just:
>
> + non-versioned thing. If non-null, ENTRY's lifetime is
> + unimportant, as it will be deep-copied into *STATUS.

I'd just drop all mention of the pool lifetime, documenting that it is
"unimportant" is a bit silly. Don't mention the deep-copy either,
it's an implementation detail. In general if functions don't mention
lifetime then it should be safe to assume that the parameters doesn't
need to live beyond the function call.

-- 
Philip Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 4 22:52:05 2005

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